csua.org/u/cqe -> www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1996-2002Feb12?language=printer
com Cakewalk In Iraq By Ken Adelman Wednesday, February 13, 2002; Page A27 Even before President Bush had placed Iraq on his "axis of evil," dire wa rnings were being sounded about the danger of acting against Saddam Huss ein's regime.
Worse: "Historical precedents from Panama to Somalia to the Arab-Isra eli wars suggest that . the United States could lose thousands of tr oops in the process." I agree that taking down Hussein would differ from taking down the Taliba n And no one favors "a casual march to war." In fact, we took it seriously the last time such fear-mongering was heard from military analysts -- when we considered war against Iraq 11 years ago. Edward N Luttwak cautioned on the eve of Desert Storm: "All those precision weapons and gadgets and gizmos and stealth fighters . are not going to make it possible to re-conquer Kuwait without many thousand s of casualties." Luttwak's e stimate of casualties was off by "many thousands," just as the current e stimates are likely to be. I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: It was a cak ewalk last time; Gordon and O'Hanlon mention today's "400,000 active-duty troops in the Ir aqi military" and especially the "100,000 in Saddam's more reliable Repu blican Guard and Special Republican Guard," which "would probably fight hard against the United States -- just as they did a decade ago during D esert Storm." I do remember a gaggle of Iraqi tro ops attempting to surrender to an Italian film crew. The bulk of the vau nted Republican Guard either hunkered down or was held back from battle. Saddam's army is one-third its size t hen, in both manpower and number of divisions. It still relies on obsole te Soviet tanks, which military analyst Eliot Cohen calls "death traps." The Iraqi air force, never much, is half its former size. Iraqi forces have received scant spare parts and no weapons upgrades. The y have undertaken little operational training since Desert Storm. The advent of precision bombin g and battlefield intelligence has dramatically spiked US military pro wess. The gizmos of Desert Storm were 90-plus percent dumb bombs. Agains t the Taliban, more than 80 percent were smart bombs. Unmanned Predators equipped with Hellfire missiles and Global Hawk intelligence gathering did not exist during the first Iraqi campaign. In 1991 we engaged a grand international coalition because we lacked a do mestic coalition. Virtually the entire Democratic leadership stood again st that President Bush. This President Bus h does not need to amass rinky-dink nations as "coalition partners" to c onvince the Washington establishment that we're right. Americans of all parties now know we must wage a total war on terrorism. Hussein constitutes the number one threat against American security and c ivilization. Unlike Osama bin Laden, he has billions of dollars in gover nment funds, scores of government research labs working feverishly on we apons of mass destruction -- and just as deep a hatred of America and ci vilized free societies. Once President Bush clearly announces that our objective is to rid Iraq o f Hussein, and our unshakable determination to do whatever it takes to w in, defections from the Iraqi army may come even faster than a decade ag o Gordon and O'Hanlon say we must not "assume that Hussein will quickly fal l" I think that's just what is likely to happen. By knocking out all his headquarters, communications, air defens es and fixed military facilities through precision bombing. By establish ing military "no-drive zones" wherever Iraqi forces try to move. By armi ng the Kurds in the north, Shiites in the south and his many opponents e verywhere. By using US special forces and some US ground forces with protective gear against chemical and biological weapons. By stationing theater missile defenses, to guard against any Iraqi Scuds still in exis tence. And by announcing loudly that any Iraqi, of any rank, who handles Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, in any form, will be severely pu nished after the war. Measured by any cost-benefit analysis, such an operation would constitute the greatest victory in America's war on terrorism. The writer was assistant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld from 1975 t o 1977, and arms control director under President Ronald Reagan.
|
http://csua.com/feed/