On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Ken Brown wrote: > Despite what Eric Cordian and others have said here, I think it unlikely > that there will be a big body-bag outcome for the US. The force balance > is so overwhelmingly one-way, and most Iraqis really don't want the > current Ba'athist government. A lot of them will give up quickly. Could > be wrong of course.
I agree, I think once the tanks roll it'll be over in 3 days. Just like Afghanistan, there'll always be somebody shooting, but it won't be any militarily organized large scale operation. > Large-scale House-to-house fighting unlikely. At least not for any but the head family palaces. Most cities will simply not want to fight. > 1) if they really only want to rule Iraq directly for 6 weeks or 2 > months that means EITHER they hand over to an international > peacekeeping force (bloody unlikely given current PNAC drumbeating in > Bushite circles) OR else the new Iraqi government is essentially the > successor to the old, with the civil administration and most of the > military still intact. Neither, we've already picked out the new dogs from a different kennel. Trained in the US of course :-) > Only alternative to that that can preserve an Iraqi state is US (or just > possibly UK - after all we've had a lot of practice) direct rule for > /years/ We don't just dfeat Iraq, we conquer it. Bush still claims > the USA is not an imperialist power. We'll conquer for a few days, then set up a military dictatorship to be replaced by a new dictatorship "elected" by the people. Then we'll steal all the oil :-) > 2) What happens if the US forces liberate somewhere (Basra would be > first) and they locals say "thanks very much for liberating us, now we > are free we are going to declare a Republic and hold elections and have > our own constitution modelled on yours..." > > Do the Americans have to say "thanks very much for the flattery, but > don't you move a muscle until we can get you ragheads back under Baghdad > where you belong"? No, we'll help put on the show of "liberation". We'll tell them who they can elect, and all the choices will be US backed. It'll be great theater, and the US will control everything indirectly. > 3) what about the Kurds? What about the Kurds? Does the US force them > to rejoin Iraq? Does the US continue to deny them Kirkuk and other > cities of their homeland? Does the US allow Turkish troops to invade > northern Iraq (i.e. remain in there- there are probably some already) > Is this the end for US support for Turkish domination over the area? If > the Turks refuse to play ball, is it the end for US support for Turkish > membership of NATO? Who knows anything about the Kurds? Who remembers Armenia? Who cares? Nobody in the US. The Kurds will be fucked from all sides and will have to fight a bit harder than before because there won't be anything to balance the Turkish attacks. The US is definitly pissed at Turkey, but it's still too important militarily to ignore. The US needs Turkey in a big way. They were just too stupid in how they went about selling a war. > 4) And what about those Iranian "People's Mujahideen" who supported the > wrong side in the first Gulf war and have been camping out in eastern > Iraq for 20 years? Their strength is often exaggerated, but they do > have tanks and they have no-where else to go. Their backs are really > against the wall (OK, the river, but its the same thing). Once upon a > time they were better soldiers than any units of the native Iraqi army. > Do they fight to the death? Or just surrender? What does the US want > with a whole load of heavily armed neo-communist militant Iranian > Muslims? Send them back to Iran to face the music? I don't think so. We'll leave them alone. They don't really want to get Daisy Cutter's or MOAB's dropped on them. By staying out of it they'll be effectively neutralized. The next government dictatorship will have to deal with it. But they are far away from the oil, so they don't matter much. Bush would like this to last a long time. He needs the votes in 2004. But that's way to far away, and if the economy stays stagnant because we can't really pay for this mess, all his "heroics" now won't be too useful a year from now. Fortunatly, he really is an idiot. Unfortunatly too I guess. Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
