WP: Top Brass On Iraq: Best Not to Invade

Michael Pollak mpollak at panix.com
Sun Jul 28 12:09:50 PDT 2002


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



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list