>>it would be a disastrous blow for US prestige and power<
What would be more disastrous for the waning US international prestige and ever abundant power to blow things up, would be as jcky has mentioned, among other things.
Failure to produce Saddam , as is the case with Ossama , after what could turn out to be one very large humanitarian mess and environmentally catastrophic operation, would be much more disastrous when all is said and done.
I find it quite astonishing how little consideration ,or at least dialogue ,regarding the potential outcomes of this campaign that many, as yourself , seem hell bent on seeing through.
The absolute victory for the US in this current part of the overall plan would be for Saddam to allow full – unencumbered inspections of his entire military capabilities. That isn’t going to happen , so a full certification of his WMD capabilities should suffice in calling off the impending attack.
Right now it’s game of chicken, one that both Saddam and the US know well by now.If the bluffs are called , the gloves come off , and the REAL conflict begins to take shape , there should be more clarity.
Right now,the principles of engagement in this theater are not been adhered to by conventional standards:
militaryhistory.about.com
I, for one, am not convinced, this will be anything more than another romp through the desert, given the objective , no matter how many bombs are dropped.
Remember , this is not Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm.The objectives have changed from discharging an enemy from an occupied territory and into its boarders , to fully assaulting the country’s infrastructure to extract ( or eliminate ) the ruling regime, and installing a " democracy " where one has never existed.
Two very different wars…maybe two very different outcomes.
militaryhistory.about.com
I hope for everyone’s sake my concerns are unfounded.
KC |
