<html><body> <DIV>Elite opposition? You wouldn't have known it from reading the voices of elite opinion, especially the New York Times - among others.  The increasing ferocity of attacks on the Iraq state (esp. Clinton's Desert Fox operation) would have signalled to any percipient observer that the days of the Baathist regime were numbered and that the US would take steps to bring it about - especially since it was clear that Saddam would not go voluntarily and that he was not about to be overthrown from internal forces. While elite leaders may have differed over the implementation and the timing of the invasion, it is fairly safe to assume that there was elite consensus and not dissension over the invasion. SR</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood@panix.com> <BR> This is further proof that the invasion was the work of a <BR>> cabal, and not the product of the heart of the imperial mechanism. <BR>> It's also an illustration of how much the executive branch can get <BR>> away with, even in the face of elite opposition; apparently the <BR>> effective dissent comes afterwards, in the form of leaks. <BR>> <BR>> Doug <BR> </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>