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 - No Political Rants -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NickSE who wrote (67)	3/1/2003 8:49:42 PM
From: NickSE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 504

U.S. Looks at Alternative War Plans Without Turkey abcnews.go.com WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. defense officials said on Saturday they could quickly adjust their war plans for Iraq after the Turkish parliament refused to grant U.S. troops access to the country's bases for a possible invasion. "U.S. military planners make their living by planning for contingencies," a senior U.S. defense official said. "Our plans are flexible enough to meet any change." Though far from ideal, a strong option would be to insert thousands of troops into northern Iraq aboard Air Force cargo planes landing on existing primitive airstrips or highways, analysts say. U.S. officials still held out hope that Turkey would come around, and have asked the NATO ally for "clarification" after the parliament first appeared to pass and then to reject Washington's request. But Washington, which offered Turkey a multibillion-dollar package of economic aid as an inducement, cannot afford to wait much longer. U.S. ships are waiting with supplies off Turkey's Mediterranean coast to unload and will need to be redeployed elsewhere. The government in Ankara could seek another vote on the motion, which would clear the way for the deployment of 62,000 American troops in Turkey. But Turkish leader Tayyip Erdogan on Saturday called the parliamentary decision a "completely democratic result." "What more do you want? It was a completely democratic result. May it be for the best," the Anatolian news agency quoted Erdogan as saying. The United States has been pressing Turkey for months for the green-light to mount a "northern front" from its bases but has said it would deploy its troops elsewhere if there was no deal. In a sign of just how important these bases are to U.S. war plans, Washington has offered Ankara up to $30 billion in grants and loan guarantees to help shield its frail economy if war breaks out. "We are seeking clarification and waiting to see what the Turkish parliament's decision is," said Tara Riegler, a State Department spokesman. Beyond the military advantages of mounting an attack on neighboring Iraq from Turkish soil, Ankara's active support in the campaign against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein would give Washington the comfort of a Muslim ally in a war many in the region deride as an anti-Islam crusade. The bulk of U.S. forces being sent to the region are being gathered in the Gulf, signaling the main brunt of an attack would come from the south. But opening a second northern front could shorten the war, U.S. planners believe. "Obviously the more assistance one gets, the easier it is; the less assistance one gets, the more difficult it is. But nonetheless it's do-able," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said last month. Officials say the Pentagon had already drawn up contingency plans in case Turkey balked. Loren Thompson, a Lexington Institute defense analyst with close ties to the U.S. military, said last month that one strategy being planned involved the insertion of about 5,000 U.S. ground troops using the rugged C-17 Globemaster III cargo aircraft. In the Kurdish northern areas of Iraq, there are large tracts of land that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has no control over -- and many boast air strips suitable for landing a C-17. Thompson said U.S. forces first could airlift a very small ground force via helicopter to seize airstrips and secure the area before bringing in the C-17s. A downside to such a strategy is that the number of troops and amount of equipment that can be transported in an airlift is limited.

To: NickSE who wrote (67)	3/1/2003 9:08:17 PM
From: paul_philp	Respond to of 504

Good questions about Chavez. August is getting closer. Paul

To: NickSE who wrote (67)	3/2/2003 1:00:36 AM
From: Rollcast...	Respond to of 504

Meddle With Mr. Chavez Saturday, March 1, 2003; Page A18 U.S. OFFICIALS long sought to play down the danger that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez poses by pointing out that his acts rarely matched his words. Mr. Chavez, who was elected president after promising a socialist revolution for Venezuela's poor majority, might talk about confiscating property, supporting leftist guerrillas in neighboring Colombia or admiring Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein, but in practice he mostly remained within democratic boundaries. Yet now the gap between Mr. Chavez's inflammatory rhetoric and his actions is narrowing. Having survived a strike by his opposition, Mr. Chavez has proclaimed 2003 the "year of the offensive"; so far he has taken steps to bring the economy under state control, eliminate independent media and decapitate the opposition. One of the strike's three top leaders has been arrested, while another has gone into hiding. Even more disturbing have been the unexplained murder of three dissident soldiers and an anti-Chavez protester and the explosion of bombs outside the Colombian and Spanish embassies. Government officials have denied responsibility, but these acts, too, followed Mr. Chavez's words: his labeling of dissident officers as "traitors" and his attacks on Colombia and Spain for "meddling." Without more meddling, and soon, Venezuela will likely see the collapse of what was once one of Latin America's richest economies and strongest democracies. Mr. Chavez appears to have tired of his half-baked populism; now he seems prepared to destroy what remains of civil society and the private sector. He placed strict controls on foreign currency and has vowed to take away the licenses of private television stations that supported the opposition. He fired 16,000 employees of Venezuela's state oil company -- the country's economic lifeline -- and moved to bring an institution long known for its professionalism under his personal control. Independent economists are forecasting a catastrophic drop in Venezuela's economic output this year; some foresee the virtual disappearance of the private sector. That would bring Venezuela far closer to Cuba, which maybe shouldn't be a surprise: Mr. Castro, who is Mr. Chavez's closest ally, reportedly has dispatched thousands of officials to Venezuela. Spain recently joined with the United States, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Portugal to support a negotiated political solution to the crisis through the mediation of Cesar Gaviria, the secretary general of the Organization of American States and a former president of Colombia. The opposition, which at times has supported anti-democratic means of ousting Mr. Chavez, now endorses Mr. Gaviria's proposal for a new presidential election or a referendum on Mr. Chavez's recall. The current constitution would allow for a referendum to be held as early as August; that may be the easiest and best way out. But Mr. Chavez knows he would very likely lose a fair vote, and he will likely do everything possible to prevent it. That's why it is essential that the Bush administration join with the "group of friends" to insist that Mr. Chavez release his political prisoners, stop his revolutionary "offensive" and commit to a decisive vote. It may be democracy's last chance. washingtonpost.com © 2003 The Washington Post Company