Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hit the Pinata - Tear this pre-war military report apart!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
ohio_dem_52186 Donating Member (139 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 06:57 PM
Original message
Hit the Pinata - Tear this pre-war military report apart!
I found this yesterday on a .gov website:
"Iraq: Potential U.S. Military Operations"
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/17349.pdf

This may have already been through DU already, but I thought I would bring it up in case...

Here are some quotes, keep in mind the date is 1/13/03, months before the start of the war.

DU'ers, take a look at it and tear it apart and reply, nothing better than fresh meat...

Here are a coupld of things I found:

Though initial emphasis was on the ouster of Saddam Hussein, the Administration has more recently pointed to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) disarmament as its prime objective. The report of the U.N. arms inspectors, due January 27 to the United Nations Security Council, is being viewed as a key element in any decision to initiate military action.

->They flip-flopped on the reason for the war, to a position that was not supported by facts...
->Before the inspectors report came out (which was generally favorable) Bush saw this as a "key element to initiate military action"

It appears that, unless there are major shifts in the international political scene, U.S. military action against Iraq will not be in the context of a large coalition similar to that formed for Desert Storm in 1991. To date, only the United Kingdom and Australia have offered their armed forces’ participation. In 1991, 28 nations contributed military units.

->Bush knew even in January that we would have a small coalition
->Oh, and don't forget Poland!

Though a short-term post-war occupation may be a possibility, it is likely that a continued deployment of substantial military ground force will be necessary for several years. For comparison, in the relatively benign environment and considerably smaller areas of Bosnia and Kosovo, NATO currently maintains a deployment of about 60,000 troops.

->Bush new that a long-term occupation was "likely"
->Good thing we were prepared for that... I beleive Mr. Bremer would have something to say about that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC