[Rhodes22-list] Fwd: Hello from Iraqi Kurdistan!

[3drecon at comcast.net]

Dave,
    Without going back to the thread, if I said lbs, I meant ROUNDS.  That is 500 shells of chemical ordnance.  I have other information that could confirm a production capability but due to my clearances, I cannot share them.  Saddam was a dangerous man and his was a dangerous regime.  He did brutalize his own people, but if that were the bases for every invasion, we would become like the Prussians and have an Army with a State rather than a State with an Army.  Having said that, I can see strategic advantages to having Iraq "pacified" in the military sense.
     As "occupiers" we tiptoe around Arab sensibilities, go out of our way to avoid collateral damage and prosecute our own soldiers whenever we catch excesses, regardless of the mitigating circumstances.  The enemy simply plays without rules.  Their Qoran says they can lie and cheat "non-believers" and it is not a sin.
    As for Iran, I don't think they are truely trying to develop weapons grade plutonium or uranium.  Would they like to, probably.  The reality is, they want nuclear power.  They export their oil to be refined then buy it back.  It's expensive and they want to modernize their electrical grid.  Our (and Europe's) blustering and jumping up and down is just causing Iran to hunker down and tell us they can do what they want.  They are a radical regime that can, potentially destabilize the are and they want to export their brand of radical Islam (the Shi'ite version) and they do support Islamic terrorists.  What to do?  Do we attack them?  If we can contain them, that might be sufficient.
     Syria is another problem.  Syria has considered Lebanon a province for centuries.  I expect Assyria coveted Phoenicia.  They have a vital interest in what occurs over their border.  I think Bashir Assad is a moderate with western leanings, but is a captive (in the loosest sense of the word) to his father's holdovers and their choices.  If he bucks them openly, they could probably overthrow him.  Musharif of Pakistan is in a similar situation though a little stonger.
     Winning in Iraq means leaving a strong defensive Army and government that can secure borders and keep the peace.  The radicals know the more they bomb the more they delay our departure which, in turn, can alienate the population.  The population, overall, is much better off to-day than under Saddam.  Are there problems?  Yes, but we progress.  We took much longer to stabilize Germany and Japan after WWII and we totally anniliated them.  If staying over there keeps the fight there, rather than here, so be it.  As for the soldiers, there isn't a one there who didn't volunteer.  Any who were there in 2001 who didn't want to could have been out by now.

Philip


-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: DCLewis1 at aol.com 

> 
> Philip, 
> 
> Thanks for your response, generally I think we’re in agreement. I gather 
> from your reply the 500 lbs found were chem not bio, so it’s really not a lot 
> on the scale of things. Also, residuals were found, but I’m not sure the 
> residuals were from an active fabrication process, or whether they date from 
> their much earlier effort (~ 10 yrs ago) when they were making and using WMD. 
> I 
> didn’t know they included Sarin, VX, & mustard, thanks for that info. 
> 
> Not to belabor the issue, but do you know whether the 500 lb reported was 
> weapons grade chemicals, or was it the weight of the ordnance that contained the 
> chemical materials and the chemicals? If they were reporting the full 
> weight of the ordnance(rocket or artillery rounds) in the 500 lb, there really 
> is 
> little chem agent involved and we’d be talking about just a very few rounds. 
> I’m not suggesting anyone pulled a fast one, but if they discovered the 
> material already in ordnance, the easy and safe thing might be to just weigh 
> the 
> entire round, that’s what I’d do; but that would really exaggerate the 
> importance of the 500 lb claim. 
> 
> Regarding your statement "there is no doubt he had them", I don't think 
> anyone would dispute you. The important thing to consider however is when did 
> he 
> have them prior to our invasion. If you read the summary of the de-briefs 
> in the book Cobra II (and if you believe the de-briefs) his military 
> leadership reported he told them well before our invasion ( I think maybe 2 
> years 
> before) that he didn't have any WMD, that he'd gotten rid of them, but he 
> wasn't 
> going to tell the world because he had an idea called "doubtful deterrence" 
> where if the world, particularly the Iranians, weren't sure that he didn't 
> have any, they would leave him alone. Actually, our forces were very concerned 
> about his chem/bio also, so to that extent his doubtful deterrence affected 
> us to. Whatever, it may be right or wrong, but I expect the debriefs are 
> what's going into the historical record unless we find some WMD, and we've been 
> looking for a while. 
> 
> I gather we’re in agreement regarding the invasion of Iraq, it was a 
> mistake. The challenge is how to get out alive and with some dignity. You say 
> the 
> top priority is winning, I think our top priority should be saving the lives 
> and limbs of American servicemen. I’m not sure it’s possible to win Iraq 
> in 
> a conventional sense - if the average Iraqi doesn’t resent us, he should be 
> close to resenting us. As per my prior post to you, if you put yourself in 
> the position of that Iraqi citizen - not the current leadership or 
> ex-leadership, the average citizen - I think you’ll see room for resentment 
> and 
> frustration directed to US forces as invaders and occupiers. Clearly, we’ve 
> killed a 
> lot of Iraqis -and they all have family - we’ve destroyed a lot of property, 
> we’ve enabled the worst kinds of lawlessness on a grand scale, we’ve 
> trashed their economy - that's not unique to us, I expect all military 
> invasions 
> and occupations evolve along those lines, especially those that weren't well 
> thought through. If you accept my point regarding frustration and resentment 
> you can understand why the guerrillas are succeeding in hiding among the 
> population, and why some aggrieved families might be party to attacks on US 
> troops. You might accept that these insurgent attacks are not the work of a 
> few 
> residual thugs, as Ed has suggested, but instead involve a lot of people, per 
> haps in an uncoordinated way, all across their country - which may be what the 
> US military report when they say the country is on the brink of a civil war. 
> I suspect what's evolving in Iraq is a new national sport called “repel the 
> invaders” - which is the sport that would quickly evolve here in the US if 
> another country invaded our turf regardless of their noble motives (that was 
> the PRC example in my post to you). I think that if the indigenous 
> population are intimidated, ambivalent, or hostile and resentful the guerrilla 
> movement will succeed - as it did in Viet Nam - unless the occupiers are 
> willing to 
> be extraordinarily violent and brutal to the populace, which we're not. This 
> assessment of the situation is substantially different from the 
> Administration cheerleaders, but I think it hits the evolving record pretty 
> well. It 
> also highlights why I don't think we're going to "win" in Iraq in any 
> conventional way; I expect that too many Iraqi's resent our presence, they 
> will host 
> the guerrilla opposition, and the few troops we've brought to bear on the 
> problem aren't enough to handle the guerrilla opposition. Seems to me the 
> surest 
> way to "win" in Iraq (i.e. bring peace to the country) is to declare victory 
> (i.e. no WMDs) and withdraw entirely, or withdraw to enclaves, and leave 
> Iraq to the Iraqis. It ends the repel-the-invaders game and the guerrilla 
> attacks on our troops. I could be wrong. 
> 
> Re Wilson: I completely agree with your assessment re Wilson’s character, 
> however I have always regarded the Wilson issue as a sideshow. I'm not ducking 
> the issue, the guy lied and that's serious, but yellow cake in Africa isn't 
> high on my list of concerns because it takes years and decades for yellow 
> cake in Africa to translate to a nuke - I want to get Al Quaidha now, before 
> they do more damage. Forget Wilson, we agree he’s a turkey. 
> 
> Regarding $25K to Palestinian bombers - I think, but am not sure, that Syria 
> is still on board with that without Iraq. You might have better info. 
> 
> Thanks again for your response and info re the chem agents found, and I’d be 
> curious to know whether the 500 lb represented just chemicals, just warheads, 
> or entire rounds, or a mix of all of the above. 
> 
> Dave 
> __________________________________________________ 
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list