Bush Speech Thread

[Sloth]

Originally posted by Sava


I hope this war goes quick, and ends with minimal casualties. Actually, I hope there are only 3 casualties. Saddam and his dumbass sons. Hope springs' eternal I suppose

Can I add a forth one? If the Italian governement goes down (as now seem possible) ....would be a welcome casualty of the war.

[Sava]

What's wrong with the Italian government? (forgive me I'm an ignorant American )

[Sloth]

It's the worst government of the West, they are incompetent crooks....

[Inverse Icarus]

did they sign up on the wrong side of a war again?

sigh... will they ever learn?

[SlowwHand]

[Spiffor]

I don't know if there will be war or not if Saddam leaves. I'm oriented towards thinking there will be no war, but only some localized clashes with the few troops that'll remain loyal to Saddam, and some radical Kurds / Shiites.

If Saddam leaves, the US and the Bushies would have reached almost all its objectives :
- getting rid of the former puppet regime to install a new one
- legitimizing this whole charade, Bush would earn a huge support in the US population
- prove that the US still is the boss
- have a reliable supply of oil in prediction of the incoming tensions with Saudi Arabia (must finish these massive financing to terrorists)
- prove the chickenhawks were right, and that a big gun is more efficient than words.


However, two goals would have been left unfulfilled :
- explicitely showing the superiority of the US army on the field
- Have a full scale training, with the chance it provides to develop new strategies, and to see how those already thought are working : you rarely have the opportunity to wage a real war against a harmless enemy.

For these last two reasons, it is possible the Hawks find another pretext to declare war anyway, but that would be terrible for their image even among the US population and expansive, so it is unlikely.

However, it is obvious the US is going to invade. This here post was wondering if the US would invade all guns blazing or not, if Saddam leaves.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Spiffor
However, two goals would have been left unfulfilled :
- explicitely showing the superiority of the US army on the field

I thought that was already unquestioned.

[SlowwHand]

What's heartening is an interview last night on Nightline.
A U.S. Ranger commander made note that Iraq couldn't compare with U.S./Brits as an army; but individually, the Iraqi's could still inflict casualties.
With that recognition, the Commander would take nothing for granted, would not allow his men to be arrogant, and that his troops would go full bore.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I don't know if there will be war or not if Saddam leaves. I'm oriented towards thinking there will be no war, but only some localized clashes with the few troops that'll remain loyal to Saddam, and some radical Kurds / Shiites.

If Saddam leaves, the US and the Bushies would have reached almost all its objectives :
- getting rid of the former puppet regime to install a new one
- legitimizing this whole charade, Bush would earn a huge support in the US population
- prove that the US still is the boss
- have a reliable supply of oil in prediction of the incoming tensions with Saudi Arabia (must finish these massive financing to terrorists)
- prove the chickenhawks were right, and that a big gun is more efficient than words.


However, two goals would have been left unfulfilled :
- explicitely showing the superiority of the US army on the field
- Have a full scale training, with the chance it provides to develop new strategies, and to see how those already thought are working : you rarely have the opportunity to wage a real war against a harmless enemy.

For these last two reasons, it is possible the Hawks find another pretext to declare war anyway, but that would be terrible for their image even among the US population and expansive, so it is unlikely.

However, it is obvious the US is going to invade. This here post was wondering if the US would invade all guns blazing or not, if Saddam leaves.

You say that you envision a few clashes..why? Who keeps power after Saddam and his boys leave? the same Baathist insiders that have been there since he came to power and his fellow tribesmen? The same security operatives responsible for all the exectuions and murders. The same Republican Guard units that crushed the rebellions? Perhaps the Shia's and Kurds would have a different view. we know that fi the Kurds made a dash for Kirkut and Mosul Turkey would invade. The Iranians would certainly try to push for their candidates, and the opposition groups would return to each others throats.

US troops will enter Iraq one way or another, and which would be messier and more deadly for Iraqi civilians could be arguable.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

- explicitely showing the superiority of the US army on the field

I thought that was already unquestioned.

Enemies of the US might hope guerilla tactics would have some efficiency. The US superiority is granted on paper, but the world hasn't seen an American territorial invasion at large scale in decades : I don't call Haiti and the likes a "large scale", Irak1 / Serbia weren't invasions, and Afghani ground troops were the real ground army of the US in Afghanistan. The last real invasion on large scale, IIRC, was Vietnam, which ended up in disadter for the US despite outstanding tech superiority.
It may be time for the US to prove Vietnam is no longer a thing of the present.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Enemies of the US might hope guerilla tactics would have some efficiency.

They can look at the Afghanistan situation as it stands now to find that out.

[DuncanK]

I think if Saddam leaves that the US will just attack Iran real quick.

[Japher]

Bush speech: I think the camera angle was bad, he looked like a little boy asking for a cookie.

His msg was clear though.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by DuncanK
I think if Saddam leaves that the US will just attack Iran real quick.

It'd be best if we waiting until April 1 to do that.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by GePap
You say that you envision a few clashes..why? Who keeps power after Saddam and his boys leave? the same Baathist insiders that have been there since he came to power and his fellow tribesmen? The same security operatives responsible for all the exectuions and murders. The same Republican Guard units that crushed the rebellions? Perhaps the Shia's and Kurds would have a different view. we know that fi the Kurds made a dash for Kirkut and Mosul Turkey would invade. The Iranians would certainly try to push for their candidates, and the opposition groups would return to each others throats.

US troops will enter Iraq one way or another, and which would be messier and more deadly for Iraqi civilians could be arguable.

I think most people will be busy with their survival, and will try to please the absolutely dominant US (which will occupy the territory no matter what). Fights between factions will begin once the US chooses which faction will lead the puppet regime, and once it leaves a toothless UN monitoring the transition.
And we'll hear how the UN botched things