Where's Osama? (Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's next)
lynx at u.washington.edu
Thu Nov 14 15:04:40 PST 2002
Now, the corollary questions: How -much- worse? Long, drug out,
lots-of-body-bags-coming-home and nasty political scandal worse, or
Vietnam-style lots-of-dead-american-conscripts worse?
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Andrew John Lopata wrote:
> Short answer: yes.
> Long answer:
> I'm no expert, but a friend of mine in the military suggested that invading
> Iraq now would be a lot different than the Gulf War. He said that urban
> combat, which will be necessary to depose Hussein, is the most difficult and
> dangerous type of combat there is. The Gulf War was fought on a flat plane
> with no obstructions or terrain differences (the desert) where superior fire
> power has a great advantage. Other reasons to think that invading Iraq this
> time will be much more difficult and likely cause many more U.S. causalities
> 1. The troops the U.S. fought against in the Gulf War were mainly recent
> conscripts with little training or motivation. Taking Baghdad will require
> fighting veteran republican guard troops.
> 2. There is no clear objective to this invasion of Iraq besides deposing
> Hussein. Ignoring the long-term consequences of this invasion (which is the
> usual practice), the short-term prospects aren't good. There is no readily
> available alternate government to install in Hussein's place. The resulting
> destabilization in the region will likely result in a U.S. military presense
> in the country for a much longer time than in the Gulf War.
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy