fodders Posted November 10, 2002 Both the US-UK-Iranian alliance and Iraq have in the last two weeks beefed up their elite units in southeastern Iraq. The US-led assault force has two primary missions: A. Within the 60 days assigned to the UN inspectors for completing their report, the troops aim to assert military control over all southeastern Iraq up to the Iranian frontier including the Hawr al-Hammar lake and marshes. They will encircle the great oilfields of Khozistan, but stay outside. This mirrors the situation established earlier in northern Iraq, where US, British, Jordanian, Turkish and Iranian special forces present since April have taken control of much of the region, but came to a standstill at the gates of the two oil cities of Kirkuk and Mosul. US-led allied forces are under orders to skirt Iraq’s northern and southern oilfields for two reasons: One, their capture would nullify the UN oil-for-food program that requires Iraq to pump oil according to a quota. Two, it could goad Saddam to extreme reprisals such as using his weapons of mass destruction against the assault troops or blowing up wells. B. When completed, the attacking force’s capture of southeast Iraq, on top of its extensive control of territory in the north and west (along the Jordanian border), will transform the political-military balance. US and allied forces will have caged Saddam Hussein, his family, the ruling Baath and the armed forces in the central region, cornering them in the cities of Baghdad and Tirkit and cutting them off from access to the oilfields. Saddam will be dispossessed of his sole source of revenue for keeping the Iraqi army fighting. These military gains would open up two options for Bush and his generals: 1. To be ready to lunge at Saddam’s regime centers from three directions and bring the war to its final, decisive stage with no further procrastination, should Iraq fail to comply with the new resolution or the UN go back to foot-dragging. 2. To be able to take the northern and southern oilfields, thereby isolating Saddam Hussein and his support group. The regime’s days would then be numbered. It would be bound to cave in under internal pressure or military coup - or both. The US president indicated that this would be his first preference when he stressed that the military option was his last. At present, the fighting in the southeastern region is focused at these points: Halafiyah, northeast of Al Amarah, and Musallan further to the north. Control of these two towns will trap the Iraqi Al Amarah force in a pocket. But even more important, the Tigris River widens out at Musallan for its journey north through the capital. From this riverside town, American units can travel upriver into the heart of Baghdad without having to fight their way past Iraqi land units. American and allied forces are also battling for the confluence of the Euphrates and Tigris at Al Muzaryriah. From there, the Euphrates River heads west, reaching the two Shiite towns of Najaf and Karbala before heading towards Baghdad. Mmilitary sources report American deliveries in the combat arena of advanced river-crossing equipment, speedboats, hydrofoils, portable bridges – transportable in retractable sections on truck beds - and amphibian craft, for transporting large-scale forces and heavy equipment across marshland and water. Some of the equipment is going through Iran. Of interest in this context is the comment made on November 3 to the Los Angeles Times by retired Lt. Gen James Terry Scott, former commander of the US Army’s Special Operations: “At the end of the day, there will have to be equipment moved across the Euphrates, because if you want to control Iraq, you have to have forces on both sides of the river. It will have to be over something that we can construct, because Iraq just doesn’t have big enough existing bridges to move that kind of heavy equipment. And if it does, Saddam Hussein is going to make sure they get blown up.” One Iraqi response to heightened US-UK-Iranian military activity in the southeast has been to set fire to the marshes. The flames seething under the surface have produced belching black clouds that are carried by wind south and east to threaten an ecological disaster on a scale recalling the Kuwaiti oil well fires Saddam set in 1991. The black haze limits visibility for US spy satellites and reconnaissance planes tracking Iraqi troop movements, impedes US-UK aircraft and helicopter bombing sorties against Iraqi forces and obstructs airborne support for the US-led ground forces in the field. 0 Share this post Link to post
m0l0t0v Posted November 10, 2002 Bush isn`t going to wait???? What a suprise! 0 Share this post Link to post
DOOM Anomaly Posted November 10, 2002 Changes occur at any time, any where, I suppose a change is occuring in Bush's vision or plan of things. 0 Share this post Link to post
Sephiroth Posted November 11, 2002 bush is a dumbass, this is more for looks than anything. he will through away human life to look good. there are worse things than iraq that he should be careing more about. and if all he wants to do is get saddam he should slip in a small group of assassins 0 Share this post Link to post
stphrz Posted November 11, 2002 Ya know what I think? I think there is not going to be a war against Iraq. Not until the next election at least . Look for things to tone down a bit in the coming weeks. All the war talk has served it's purpose for the time being. (re: the recent elections and the Republican gains in the House and Senate) Look for things to flare up again in mid 2004. 0 Share this post Link to post
DooMBoy Posted November 11, 2002 YAY, LET'S GO TO WAR!!!!!!!! I CAN HARDLY WAIT!!!! Bush = fuckhead 0 Share this post Link to post
Fletcher` Posted November 11, 2002 War sucks. If we go to war, I'm going to Canada. 0 Share this post Link to post
mmnpsrsoskl Posted November 11, 2002 DooMBoy said:Bush = fuckhead Heh. Ain't it the truth. Here's some proof : http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/M.P.Barrow/images/bush.jpg 0 Share this post Link to post
DOOM Anomaly Posted November 11, 2002 ravage said:War sucks. If we go to war, I'm going to Canada. mmph dont be so sure that Canada will be safe, Canada is quite close to the US and perhaps Canada will Join in with them if there is a war, in which we hope there is not. mmnpsrsoskl said:Heh. Ain't it the truth. Here's some proof : http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/M.P.Barrow/images/bush.jpg Haahahahahahahaha..ahem...Hahahah that is pretty funny. 0 Share this post Link to post
The Ultimate DooMer Posted November 11, 2002 mmnpsrsoskl said:Heh. Ain't it the truth. Here's some proof : http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/M.P.Barrow/images/bush.jpg rofl. 0 Share this post Link to post
scorpion Posted November 11, 2002 That's only part of his serious illness. http://80.84.229.168/2002/oktober/op-kop.jpg 0 Share this post Link to post
dsm Posted November 11, 2002 mmnpsrsoskl said:Heh. Ain't it the truth. Here's some proof : http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/M.P.Barrow/images/bush.jpg Funny, I just talked about that picture with my siblings and parents yesterday :-P 0 Share this post Link to post
TheHighestTree Posted November 11, 2002 Oh my god...i know he was a dumbass, but daaaamn...he's so...so...convincing? 0 Share this post Link to post