Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (38996)	8/20/2002 10:37:34 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

This isn't true. Our problem in Iraq, just like Israel's problems in Palestine, would be with the civilians, not the military. I just heard Phebe Marr say on NPR the other day that the vast majority of Iraqis would welcome our coming, if we helped get them a decent government. Iraq is largely urban, middle class and well educated. Let me get this logic straight. The US wants to oust Saddam Hussein with a massive military attack. The way that this is going to work is because the Iraqis see that it is hopeless. But the US is keeping all its troop movements as quiet as possible. And the local countries, who really support the US, are nevertheless refusing to publicly support the US attack, which is, as are all diplomatic / political / military excursions, dependent on enthusiasm and publicity (as we did against Afghanistan). Yes, you have it straight. It's known as getting your ducks in a row, and keeping options open, for as I believe we will go in, I also think they are still arguing about exactly how. If you don't have men and material in place, you don't have very many options, do you? And until the very day we go in, when everybody sees there is no going back, all of Iraq's neighbors will oppose us. For the sake of pro forma Arab unity, and because they would be imbeciles not to. If there is the slightest chance that we could back out (esp. considering our sorry record in 1991 and 1995), who would be dumb enough to support us and then face Saddam's wrath alone? But on the day we go in, we will have suddenly acquired several new best buddies. So we're getting men into place. Tell me, do we ship 8,000 men into Aqaba often? after I proved that the Turks have already been there for four years Carl, you proved that they had been there at one time four years ago, not the same thing at all as staying there. As for those stories you cited in the Arabic News, did you read them? The US have completed its negotiations with four countries in the Middle East in order to use their territories during its attack against Iraq, especially Jordan in order to topple its President Saddam Hussein, according to the Lebanese daily Assafir. The paper explained quoting diplomatic sources that the "US has completed intensive negotiations with several countries including Jordan, Kuwait and Turkey on using its territories and lands to carry out its attacks against Iraq and to topple the Iraqi President Saddah Hussein." The same sources stressed to Assafir that it "was agreed with Jordan to implement a military plan according to which the American forces will enter by land to Iraq." The plan states the paticipation of 5,000 soldiers from the Jordanian army, most of them from Bani Hassan tribe after they carried out special military training.