www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10749-2002Jul27.html
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 28, 2002; Page A01
Despite President Bush's repeated bellicose statements about Iraq,
many senior U.S. military officers contend that President Saddam
Hussein poses no immediate threat and that the United States should
continue its policy of containment rather than invade Iraq to force a
change of leadership in Baghdad.
The conclusion, which is based in part on intelligence assessments of
the state of Hussein's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
programs and his missile delivery capabilities, is increasing tensions
in the administration over Iraqi policy.
[The whole article is worth reading both for the little bits that are new and the many bits that are hereby consecrated as mainstream fact simply by appearing on page A1 of the Washington Post. But there's one paragraph near the end that I'd like to highlight:]
A major goal of U.S. policy in a post-Hussein Iraq would be to prevent
the creation of an independent state in the heavily Shiite south, or
an independent Kurdish state in the north. To fulfill U.S. promises to
Turkey and Arab states that Iraq would remain whole, a defense
official said, "I think it is almost a certainty that we'd wind up
doing a campaign against the Kurds and Shiites." That would represent
a striking reversal of administration policy of supporting the Kurds
against Baghdad.
[Rest of article at:]
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10749-2002Jul27.html