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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (43493)	12/22/2002 6:37:46 PM
From: IQBAL LATIF	Respond to of 50167

US capable of toppling Saddam in two days By Tony Allen-Mills WASHINGTON: AMERICAN military planners are preparing airstrikes on Iraq of such unparalleled intensity that some senior Pentagon officials believe that a ground war could be won in two days. A surprise combination of ferocious bombardment and a near-simultaneous advance on Baghdad is intended to cause Saddam Hussein’s regime to “implode”. The Pentagon’s plans for a lightning overland thrust from Kuwait are based on the belief that Saddam expects a prolonged air campaign, followed by a cautious advance. By throwing America’s elite airborne and infantry forces into an immediate race for Baghdad, possibly within hours of the first bombing, Washington hopes to deliver a crushing psychological shock that will shatter Iraqi resistance. The plan was inspired by the conviction of the Pentagon’s civilian leadership that Saddam’s authority is “as solid as the Berlin Wall”. Paul Wolfowitz, deputy US secretary of defence, said recently that Saddam presided over “a brittle, oppressive regime that might break easily”. The high-risk elements of the plan — in particular the danger that a premature advance might be vulnerable to a counter-attack — are believed to have provoked last week’s warnings by senior US commanders that the Pentagon’s civilian leadership is underestimating the Iraqi threat and failing to plan for worst-case scenarios. Experts close to the Pentagon say these might include the use of human shields to block an American advance. Daniel Goure, a former Pentagon planner, suggests that Saddam could create a refugee crisis by forcing up to 4m people out of Baghdad. “He can burn houses, go door to door and organise it very quickly as the Serbians did in Kosovo,” Goure said. General Eric Shinseki of the US army and General James Jones, commandant of US marines, have expressed concern about sending a fast-moving ground force to Baghdad without tens of thousands of reinforcements. Jones said he did not align himself with “folks around town who seem to think that this is preordained to be a very easy military operation”. Leaks of invasion plans have emphasised the need for speed and tactical surprise. According to officials, some armoured units would “charge across Iraq” without stopping to let slower-moving units catch up. John Pike, one of Washington’s foremost military analysts, has calculated that an advancing American force led by Abrams M-1 tanks and protected by heavy air support could cover the 300 miles from the Kuwaiti border to Baghdad at 25-30mph. “They will be in the suburbs of Baghdad at the end of the second day,” he said. “It’s all going to unfold so quickly that Saddam’s ears will still be ringing from the sound of the bombs when US tanks start showing up.” Dr Paul Moorcraft, a former Ministry of Defence policy expert who edits the London-based Defence Review, predicts a ground war lasting “a maximum of four days”. The American military is up to five times stronger than at the time of the 1991 Gulf war, while the Iraqis are a third of their strength then, he said. “I estimate that only 10,000 Iraqi troops will even think about fighting back.” Both American and British planners believe that forces loyal to Saddam intend to fall back quickly to Baghdad, raising the prospect of a long siege. “We would not be in any hurry to dislodge him,” said a senior Whitehall source. “Once Saddam loses control of the countryside and the oil, his support will quickly collapse.” American officials hope that once it is clear that his situation is desperate, Saddam will either try to flee or will be shot by one of his generals. The British position towards Saddam has hardened in recent days, with officials beginning to shed their previous reluctance to be drawn into comments on the need for “regime change”. Under pressure from Labour MPs, Tony Blair has preferred to focus on weapons of mass destruction rather than Saddam himself. But British planners have been told to assume there will be no let-off for the Iraqi leader once war begins as there was in 1991. Both US and British sources suggest that the weapons inspections process might drag into February or even March before Bush declares that war is the only option. Saddam’s eldest son Uday has been awarded the highest doctoral distinction by an Iraqi university after presenting his 320-page thesis, The Future of the Arab Nation in the 21st Century. —TST US sets calendar for war with February as ideal WASHINGTON: The United States is forging ahead with plans for war in Iraq, but is not expected to decide until the end of January, analysts said Saturday. One decided, the war would begin quickly, they said, adding that diplomatic considerations will stop the Bush administration from striking before February but an air campaign as early as next month is not out of the question to achieve some tactical surprise. Washington said Iraq was in “material breach” of its UN obligations because of alleged omissions in its December 7 weapons declaration. “The clock starts ticking now, the US having used word material breach that could lead to trigger a conflict,” Charles Pena of the Cato Institute said. “I don’t see what Iraq can do at this point other than surrender,” he added. War isn’t inevitable at this point but it’s looking very likely, said Michael Vickers, an analyst from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. According to Vickers, for the Americans, the best time window for conflict with Iraq would be between November and February. On either side, the stifling desert heat would take its toll on unaccustomed US troops, but also because of the political requirements to make a case at the UN Security Council. A war on Iraq would start with a preceding air campaign, like the Gulf War or Afghanistan with precision guided munitions, Pena said, adding that it would not be necessary to wait for all the ground troops to be in place. For Vickers the air campaign would most likely be shorter than that of the Gulf War, and would be followed by a quick ground campaign to isolate Saddam Hussein. —AFP