[Vision2020] Your Position on the War in Iraq

[Mark Rounds]

Garret

I have thought about this one for a while.  Before the current War, I was
outspoken in saying that the level of military preparedness wasn't there and
that I had not seen any compelling new information to justify War.  I also
know there is a whole lot I don't know based on the fact that I don't really
have a need to know that balances out  the risk to our human intelligence
sources.  

This is not to say that I believed that Saddam was blameless.  He is shrewd
and ruthless.  He has been playing the blame game, hiding weapons and
weapons programs and playing for time, hoping that the world would lose
interest in him.

I had hoped that the brinksmanship that our President was playing would
yield more results.  That wasn't the case.  Some folks will argue that it
was because there wasn't anything to find.  I have to disagree on that one.
Here is one example out of many I could name.  There are hundreds of tons of
VX gas and other extremely toxic agents that have susposedly been destroyed.
The real easy way to prove that is to take the UN inspectors to the sites
where the distruction took place and let them sample the soil.  

The only really fast way to destroy large amounts of toxic agents is to
incinerate them.  However it isn't really clean and the soil for miles
around will show traces for decades.  Iraq hasn't told the investigators
where they did it, never mind how.  

You can also chemically neutralize these agents but that still leaves
hundreds of tons of still nasty chemicals to be disposed of.  Again, soil
samples of the places they dumped it or visits and samples from the tanks
where the residue was being stored would prove this in an afternoon.  Again,
nothing.  There are lots of other issues that really call into doubt the
truthfulness of the Iraqi claims that they have disarmed but this will serve
as an easy one.

So in my mind at least, I was sure he was hiding weapons in vilolation of
the treaties he had signed.   The question then becomes how would he use
them? Would Saddam give them to terrorists?  Would he use them on his
neighbors?  Would he use them on his own people?  His record on these issues
speak for themselves, however I had yet to see how it was America's business
to take this on unilaterally.

Well, that decision has been made.  I didn't like it and I hope that when
this is all over, it will be shown what caused the hammer to fall but it is
largely immaterial now.  We are at War.  

What we must now guard against is fighting the war the way Saddam wants us
to fight it, i.e. going into the cities.  We are punishing his units in the
field and allowing civilians to leave from both Bagdad and Basra, the two
large cities we have invested.

The strategy that I see developing is now to wait them out and either let
them surrender or weaken them to the point that they try to run away or are
easily captured.  We have lots of airmoblie forces in the theatre that would
make the capture of fleeing command and control assets very likely. 50 miles
from Bagdad the terrain favors our technological edge.  Let them come to us
or run away.

Saddam is doing everything in his power to break us out of that strategy.
In Basra, paramilitary forces are keeping the civilians from leaving at gun
point even though the Brits would be happy to let them go, feed and shelter
them.  He is using human shields to defend his high value targets.  He is
quartering his troops in civilian areas.  His troops are donning US uniforms
(stolen from our laundries in Kuwait months ago) to encourage friendly fire
incidents.  They are also attacking in civilian clothes to make our soldiers
distrust the locals perhaps generate incidents were civilians will be killed
by troops who thought they were defending themselves.  His propaganda
machine is churning out accounts of incidents, both real and imagined that
go against the grain of world opinion.

All these actions are aimed at making the Americans impatient and rash.  We
could win an attack on Bagdad but the cost for all concerned would be very
high.  A much better strategy is to let their morale break.  Indeed there
are signs that it is occurring already.  Iraqi Civilians are fleeing target
ares in droves when they can.  The only places they aren't are where
Saddam's gunmen hold their families hostage.  The persistant questioning of
whether or not Saddam is dead forces him to expose himself again and again
to situations where he might be taken or killed.  

Several Divisional sized units which have not surrendered, are not attacking
or hindering our movements.  I suspect our special ops folks who are in
contact with commanders have negotiated "deals" to keep these forces intact
on paper but shield families of the officers who are in the hands of
Saddam's gunmen.

I realize that this is a dollar answer to a nickle question Garret, but the
bottom line is that while I thought the rush to war was premature, we are
there and the best way to win this with the least loss of life is to pursue
the conflict in a slow and measured manner.  So yeah, I have swung from
opposing the war to supporting our troops and methodology because from where
we are now, it is the best strategy in terms of loss of human life and
achievement of something for this effort.

Mark Rounds



>I'm wondering if there are any others out there who swing from supporting 
>this war to opposing it?
>
>Before this started, I was in the camp that wanted the UN to solve this 
>problem, preferably by using the inspections.  That not being the case,  I 
>did not want the US to invade Iraq.
>
>Since we are there, I swing from wanting our military to finish this off and 
>remove Saddam's regime while we are there to wanting to call a cease fire 
>before the street fighting in Baghdad begins and more blood is shed.
>
>My favorite source of info (since I only get PBS on tv) is www.cspan.org via 
>RealPlayer.  They have pretty comprehensive coverage which includes media 
>from many outlets.  Plus they have a call in show where our fellow citizens 
>can spout there support or opposition.
>
>This definately is a complex issue, not black and white at all.  So many 
>arguments are for and against the invasion.  It's pretty over-whelming and 
>frustrating though seeing Mr. Bush simplyfing this so much.
>
>I will be at the peace rally on saturday at 1pm at Guy Wick's Field showing 
>my support for peace and gathering with others who are opposed to Mr. Bush's 
>potential future military actions in the middle east.  It is our duty as 
>Americans to prevent the military machine from stirring up even more hatred 
>towards the US for our aggresive foreign policies.
>
>We deserve to have leaders who are honest, upfront and wage peace.  We won't 
>get them if we stay silent.
>
>Any ways, I'd like to hear from others whose views on our actions in Iraq 
>right now change like mine do.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Garrett Clevenger
>
>http://www.icehouse.net/garrett
>
>"What are we doing to our Home?!:("
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
>http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>               http://www.fsr.net                       
>          mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>
>