[Rhodes22-list] WAR

[Roger Pihlaja]

Guys,

Iraq has a simple mass balance accounting problem.  Apparently, we have
evidence that in the early 90's, Iraq had something like 20,000 - 30,000
chemical/biological warheads.  Some of these were designed to fit on top of
SKUD missiles, some into artillery shells, & some into aircraft-dropped
gravity bombs.  It turns out that the 11,000 page declaration that Iraq
filed in response to the UN's call for an accounting of its weapons of mass
destruction did not mention any of these warheads.  Nor did it give any
accounting of how, when, or where these weapons were destroyed, dismantled,
etc.  Iraq claims these records were "lost". "I destroyed several thousand
tons of the most toxic stuff on earth without any written procedures, or
written records, & there is no trace of the facility that I used."   "The
dog ate my homework, honest!"  So, the question boils down to, Ten years
ago, Iraq had many thousands of chemical/biological warheads.  Now Iraq
claims to have none.  Show us the records & the facilities where they were
destroyed.  Otherwise, the conclusion must be that Iraq still has these
weapons & is hiding them.  No one disputes that Iraq had these weapons ten
years ago.  In the meantime, Saddam has had ten years to hide these weapons
in an area the size of the State of California.  Last week, acting on a US
intelligence tip, the UN Weapons Inspectors found 11 empty chemical
warheads.  At this rate, the disarming process will require several hundred
years!

Having said that, it's not clear to me that having our troops siting on
Iraq's border, with the Northern & Southern No-Fly Zones, huge teams of
inspectors combing the cities & countryside, & round the clock satellite
surveillence isn't preferable to an invasion.  The whole process is a very
public spectacle in Iraq & it's got to be a huge loss of face & pride for
Sadam.  Perhaps, if the inspection process is allowed to continue; then,
some of his officers will crack under the pressure & defect or assasinate
Sadam.

If we invade now, we must assume that Sadam has these weapons hidden
somewhere.  With his back up against the wall, Sadam will attempt to use
them.  He will have nothing to lose.  This is not a huge problem for our
troops because they are trained & equipped to handle this kind of warfare.
The nightmare scenario is that Sadam will contaminate huge areas of the
Middle East & East Africa with incredibly toxic & long lived biological &
chemical materials.  How do you protect the populations in these areas?  How
do you prevent the wind & ocean currents from spreading these materials all
over the Indian Ocean & eventually, all over the world?

I am less worried that Iraq currently has nuclear weapons because the UN
Weapons Inspectors did a much better job of finding & destroying Iraq's
Nuclear Program sites back in the early 1990's.  In addition, these nuclear
weapons sites tend to be pretty large & much more difficult to hide than
chemical/biological weapons sites.

Roger Pihlaja
S/V Dynamic Equilbrium

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Schultz" <BenS@ApproSystems.com>
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org>
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 7:20 AM
Subject: RE: [Rhodes22-list] WAR


> I think that's the crux of the problem:  why exactly are we attacking?  I
> know that there are suspicions of a nuclear program, but if we've got the
> goods on Saddam, why can't the inspectors find anything?
>
> I have two close friends overseas in active duty.  They both volunteered
to
> go, and I would never expect either of them complain about being there.
But
> the fact is, thatsome of our men and women will most likely be coming home
> in coffins.  It better be worth it.
>
> I think that our citizens and other governments would be more supportive
if
> we would strategically leak at least a little bit of the dirt that we have
> on Iraq.
>
> Ben
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Alm [mailto:salm@mn.rr.com]
> Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 12:34
> To: Rhodes
> Subject: [Rhodes22-list] WAR
>
>
> This looks to me to be a no-win situation.  We're damned if we do and
damned
> if we don't.  If we go after the oil, it'll look like greedy, 19th
> century-style resource-grabbing.  If we're just trying to stabilize the
> region, i.e., going after the menacing anti-American regime, it'll look
like
> colonization/culturalization--one of the main reasons the Arab world hates
> us in the first place.  Doing nothing at all doesn't really seem very
> acceptable either.  If our battle cry is going to be to avenge 9/11, and
we
> go in there without much proof of WMD, it'll just look like an old
fashioned
> lynching.  We're not really fighting for OUR oil--we get most of ours
> elsewhere.  But we are fighting on behalf of oil for our European allies.
> But they don't seem to support us so I guess Bush'll just do whatever he
> thinks is best for them.
>
> America is the big dog on the block and that makes us everybody's problem
> AND solution.  The big dog has the biggest bark and bite, but also leaves
> the biggest, stinky messes to clean up.
>
> Like it or not, and I don't, it looks like we're going to invade.  I can't
> think of any circumstances under which Bush would say, "Oh, OK.  Never
> mind."  The Iraqi army will fall like a house of cards, but no doubt
Saddam
> has some dirty tricks up his sleeve.  There's speculation now that he
might
> torch his own oil wells.
>
> Slim
>
> _________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
>  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> The information transmitted may contain confidential material and is
> intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any
> action by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
> prohibited.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the information from
> your system and contact the sender.
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>
> _________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>