War Plans

[videoholic]

This is what happens when the government doesn\'t control the media.  What do we gain by telling the Iraqi\'s this info?

SIMULTANEOUS MOVES  
The formal onset of the war, if Bush gives the go-ahead, is expected to begin with three nearly simultaneous moves. That is a sharp contrast to the sequential nature of the Gulf War, in which the ground war only began after five weeks of bombing.
 
      On the ground, tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Apache attack helicopters will charge north into Iraq from Kuwait. Most Army units will be on the west, heading northward toward the Euphrates River, while the Marine Corps and British forces will jump off farther to the east and move up alongside Iraq’s southern marshes around the southern city of Basra.
 
     In the north, the U.S. military also plans to launch some kind of offensive, though the continued foot-dragging by the Turkish government could impede the execution of the attack envisioned by the plan. Planners think the minimum U.S. force needed in the north to create a second front is about one division, plus some specialized reinforcements, for a total of about 20,000 troops. While some troops and gear can be flown into airstrips in Kurdish areas in the north, getting a force that size into Iraq by air would be a logistical nightmare.
 
     “General Franks . . . is looking at lots of options,” Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Friday. “My guess: In the end, we will have U.S. forces in northern Iraq, one way or the other.”
   
    The pace of Special Operations forces will also be stepped up. Their main focus will be denying Iraqi forces access to certain chemical and biological weapons sites that cannot be bombed for fear of setting up toxic plumes, according to people familiar with their missions and training. Preventing Iraq from launching drones or missiles against Israel will be another major focus of Special Operations troops and other units. Some Special Operations personnel may be ordered to protect key points in Iraq’s oil fields to prevent any Iraqi attempt to set them afire.
       
http://www.msnbc.com/news/879623.asp?0cv=CA01

We will gain nothing. They have already prepared for our forces from the last several attempts to infiltrate their governing cities. Having tossed a few bones to their forces last time we only gave them time to design and purchase better equipment. They will be tougher to defeat this time rather than the last time. We should have completed the task and proclaimed an all out war with them whether it began a WWIII or not. We need to finish it this time. No holding back. If we hold back and let the military leaders go we will again pay a much greater price years down the road.

[videoholic]

I read an article saying they just bought new tank supplies 7 months ago.

THey will finish it this time I can assure you.  No way they could possibly go at it without finishing it.

Remember, before we did not have UN and allied approval to oust Saddam.  Our mission was to liberate Kuwait.  This is different.  The entire mission is terrorist based.  Chemical and biological removal and the ousting of saddam are top priorities.

Remember, before we did not have UN and allied approval to oust Saddam.

And we don\'t either this time, all we have is our B*tch Tony Blair, Spain, and a few countries that have no actual say.

[videoholic]

We already have UN approval.  About 3 times.

We had more support 12 years ago vs. this time around.

[videoholic]

Not true.  Polls in the US are more for the war now than they were back then.

World wide support of course we had more back then.  Back then it was for liberation.  This is more pre-emptive.

we have no war plans... we just say we do for political purposes... our plans involve peace.

Are you sure? I was still grammer school then, but even I remember all of the support for Desert Storm back then.

Hurricane, you just made me spit water on my keyboard.

[videoholic]

Well as of today maybe not.  I think the polls have slid a little bit.  But a week or so ago the US was over 70%.

And it\'s grammar....   heh

75 % of the UK pop support a War if a Second UN res is passed

but

that figure gose down to 20% of the UK pop who support a WAR WITHOUT a Second UN res.

THATS 80% against a pre-emptive id Prez Bush had his way.

[videoholic]

But here is the problem.  The first UN resolution passed UNANIMOUSLY.  And Iraq has done nothing to not warrent a bogus second resolution passing.

IHonestly think the Bush administration has lost much world opinion just by talking, repeated times we have been told how the United States intends to ignore anyone who disagrees with them, yes, this will boost those polls over in Europe...