Mad Mike Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 I've been watching Powell. Toughest talk yet about Iraq. I expect some form of declaration any day. Bet on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 1 week from today March 12) the B1s start the Sorti's. Mark it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 The longer they wait the higher the air temps climb so they probably need to move soon. My fear is that North Korea will attack the south as soon has hostilities begin in Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Yep, That's why we're sending another battle group to the Sea of Japan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 You think they'll start without knowing whether or not Turkey will allow the U.S. to use their soil as a staging ground for an invasion? Apparently Turkey's majority party leader has hinted that parliament will reconsider its weekend decision to deny permission to the U.S. I would think that the starting date of the war would hinge on whether a new vote from Turkey's parliament is imminent, and when it will occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Didn't know about the battle group dispatched to the Sea of Japan. I was a little curious when it was reported that 300,000 troops have been deployed to take out an Iraq that is much weaker now then during the gulf war. I guess that number includes the troops sent to watch NK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 The only battle group deployment I'm aware of is the Abraham Lincoln being deployed to the Gulf to relieve another CBG. Has there been anther deployment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Im not up on the group names etc, but a battle group (no aircraft carrier) left Pearl HArbor over the weekend. I think an aircraft carrier normally there (Kitty HAwk?) is now in the gulf. Kurp, I think they are going on the results of the first vote. If they revote and change their minds, it would probably delay things a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 This is not meant to be a flame post, but is anyone concerned that this is the beginning of WWIII... What I mean is if War breaks out in Korea, do more nations get involved, are we spread too thin? I am not trying to make a point, I'm asking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Excuse me, it was the Nimitz Carrier Battle Group deployed to the Gulf to relieve one of the CBG's in the Gulf region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Originally posted by codeorama This is not meant to be a flame post, but is anyone concerned that this is the beginning of WWIII... What I mean is if War breaks out in Korea, do more nations get involved, are we spread too thin? I am not trying to make a point, I'm asking... Ignoring for the moment the lack of definition for "world war", I see only regional conflicts coming at this point. It doesn't mean that it couldn't happen, of course. But then again the War on Terror might well be labeled a "world war" as well, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 It does concern me that we could be spread to the max IF we have to confront NK and Iraq at the same time, then the fear is if ANOTHER problem (Outside of the attack range of the first two) breaks out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SPACESKINS Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 I hear you Code AND Redman.You have a good question.Been wondering the same.Is this going to be a "quikie" war or the kind where one thing leads to another and takes us to "Vietnam"? :?: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 The problem as I see it in Iraq won't be the war or the removal/destruction of Saddam's regime. Our military is simply excellent and should overwhelm them very quickly. It will be the subsequent occupation and rebuilding that will be problematic. There could end up being a civil war there, which in turn could give rise to an Islamic Revolution like we saw in Iran. That would be an absolute mess to be in the middle of, or even if it happened after our troops had pulled out. But I don't compare this to Vietnam. We had no goal or even particular strategy there, and we placed limitations on ourselves that hurt us. That won't happen this time because we learned those lessons all too well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 If North Korea is in need of attention that they would attack south Korea, it only takes tactical Nukes to end the nonsense. Let me be in charge and I'll show what a war hawk would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Originally posted by NavyDave If North Korea is in need of attention that they would attack south Korea, it only takes tactical Nukes to end the nonsense. Let me be in charge and I'll show what a war hawk would do. I wonder if a nuclear exchange on the peninsula would bring China into the mix immediately or if they would wait and assess before acting. In any case, China is, IMHO, why we handle N. Korea with such kid gloves when they deserve an a$$-whipping. That and the uncertianty of whether or not they (NK) might just be crazy enough to start a nuclear war.Scary stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 Some say that since Turkey has given us the high hard one, Israel will need to open a front with Syria creating a path through which Iraq's northern oil fields can be secured. The Arab world will respond and attempt to utterly destroy Israel. This will in effect spread war throughout the region. Syria has redeployed thousands of troops, pulling them out Lebanon for use if Israel makes such a move. Syria's main missile factory along with some of her missiles were destroyed by Israeli air strikes last year to hinder Syria's ability to resist an Israeli onslaught. Syria is still believed to have close to 10,000 missiles stockpiled in various hidden locations. Iran has deployed elite troops into northern Iraq further complicating matters. The US has discover that Syria and Iran have made protection packs with China. President Bush and Jiang Zemin dislike each other very much. The day President Bush declared the axis of evil, he confirmed intent to militarily resolve all nations within the umbrella of the term. It has become apparent since then, that North Korea stands ready to launch an assault against all US troops in South Korea. President Bush has been advised to take out the troops but now he finds that he cannot do so without looking lame and showing that his protection obligations to Japan and other Asian allies mean nothing. The very fact that he even considered that option now has pushed Japan to build nuclear weapons, seeing it as a necessity. This will now result in China having North Korea also attack Japan. The Turkish action possibly means the US will be forced to engage Iraq through narrow land corridors in Kuwait thus allowing Iraq to spring a terrible trap on US forces. Speculation is that Saddam will poison the land with Anthrax which can live in the soil for a very long time thereby inflicting heavy US casualties. When this theory surfaced a statement was released by the US saying that any soldiers killed by bio-weapons would be cremated in country and that their remains would not be returned to the states. Saddam is also believed to have bio-weapons in place to be used specifically for poisoning oil fields rendering them useless for an as yet unknown length of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 If the bio weapons come out, all bets are off and a part of Iraq will be uninhabitable for a VERY long time. This will be over quickly, then Korea can be dealt with, if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 tex- Where do you get your information? We don't need a Syrian corridor into Northern Iraq to secure oil fields without Turkey. We still have access to Turkish airbases even without the agreement last weekend, so we'll likely secure those oil fields with a combination of air power and light infantry and special ops and spooks on the ground, all of whom will be flown in. Besides, the last thing in the world we want is for the Israelis to so much as fart while this is going on. Our greatest fear is that they'll be attacked with WMD's and feel forced to respond. As for Iran's "elite" troops, they are actually Iraqi Shiite expatriates who are enemies of Saddam and have taken refuge in Iran (the Iranians are also Shiite Muslims). They're guerilla fighters and nothing more. The N. Korea aspect of this is more complex, and I don't doubt that one of the things prompting the NK's is that our attention is focused on Iraq right now. They're trying to exploit our perceived weakness as much as possible. I'll guarantee you one thing though. If any WMD's are used on the Korean Peninsula, China will be involved. Period. There's no way they stand by for that. What I wonder about the Chinese is whether they'd act if we, for example, bombed the NK's nuclear complex or blockaded their ports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoDrill Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 Originally posted by tex ............. The Turkish action possibly means the US will be forced to engage Iraq through narrow land corridors in Kuwait thus allowing Iraq to spring a terrible trap on US forces. Speculation is that Saddam will poison the land with Anthrax which can live in the soil for a very long time thereby inflicting heavy US casualties. When this theory surfaced a statement was released by the US saying that any soldiers killed by bio-weapons would be cremated in country and that their remains would not be returned to the states. Saddam is also believed to have bio-weapons in place to be used specifically for poisoning oil fields rendering them useless for an as yet unknown length of time. That's what I fear: That Saddam, knowing the futility of openly facing the US, and knowing he won't get off the hook, will pull out all the stops with the Bio/Chem weapons (including giving them away) and pursue a scorched earth policy within Iraq. I hadn't thought of the anthrax/soil thing. Simply lighting the oil fields on fire again seems like a distinct possibility. After all, if he's going to lose, what does he have to lose? I don't see North Korea actually attacking the South -- that would ensure their destruction. If anything, all of their attempts of late have been designed to get diplomatic recognition and a guarantee of non-agression from the US. They know they'd get their asses kicked if they started something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 We still have access to Turkish airbases even without the agreement last weekend, so we'll likely secure those oil fields with a combination of air power and light infantry and special ops and spooks on the ground, all of whom will be flown in. Special forces have been there for over a year. We relived uncle saddam of a couple of his air bases and set them up for our own use. Besides, the last thing in the world we want is for the Israelis to so much as fart while this is going on. Our greatest fear is that they'll be attacked with WMD's and feel forced to respond. My own feeling on this is that if Isreal is attacked with WMD, they will respond, and not too many arab countries will care. They would do the same thing if they were attacked with WMD. I'll guarantee you one thing though. If any WMD's are used on the Korean Peninsula, China will be involved. I don't think that China will mess with us. They want to, but they have a little way to go before they can play with us. we will ahve to deal with China eventually, though. They are striving to build their military up enough to take Tawain, and they are betting we won't sacrifice a West Coast city to keep it. Thanks Bubba, for helping the Chi Coms make up 30 or 40 years of technology gap in the 90's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 Originally posted by Air Sarge I don't think that China will mess with us. They want to, but they have a little way to go before they can play with us. we will ahve to deal with China eventually, though. They are striving to build their military up enough to take Tawain, and they are betting we won't sacrifice a West Coast city to keep it. Thanks Bubba, for helping the Chi Coms make up 30 or 40 years of technology gap in the 90's. Agreed re Bubba. What was that about "useful idiots?" I also agree that China will be our foe in the next Cold War, and that they're building up their force as fast as they can to match us. I'm just not convinced that they'd be willing to simply stand by and let a regime in North Korea that they have sponsored simply fall to the South Korean and United States military. And they need not attack us directly, BTW. They could instead attack only the South Koreans, or perhaps even see this as an opportunity to launch an attack on Taiwan. At the end of the day, God knows. The Chinese have a very closed leadership and represent a complex problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 Don't make the mistake of assuming that a war with China is not forthcoming because of a reluctance on China's part to participate. They may have no choice. North Korea has been preparing their vast complex of underground tunnels at the DMZ and has pre-positioned thousands of artillery pieces and troops because they are nice and don't want to attack? The so called Iraqi Shiite expatriates are not what they seem. It is doubtful the oil fields can be secured with airfields and a handful of special forces. Iran, Turkey and the Kurds all have designs on the treasure represented by all that oil. Israel will resist our demands to attack Syria because they know this game is being played for keeps. But did Israel think all the US aid and support they have received came without a price tag attached? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 Originally posted by tex Don't make the mistake of assuming that a war with China is not forthcoming because of a reluctance on China's part to participate. They may have no choice. * * * The so called Iraqi Shiite expatriates are not what they seem. Israel will resist our demands to attack Syria because they know this game is being played for keeps. But did Israel think all the US aid and support they have received came without a price tag attached? I appreciate the response, but you need to explain the points above. On the Israel point, are you saying that our aid to them obligates them to attack? I can't imagine them or any other country for that matter agreeing with that position, no matter how closely allied with us they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 The discovered protection packs between China, Iran and Syria will pressure China to act. Additionally, if NK attacks the south it is a forgone conclusion that the contingent of US troops positioned there will have no choice but to use nuclear weapons to hold off a North Korean blitz. Use of those weapons will force China to response militarily if only to mass troops at its boarder. Nuclear detonations, massive troop build ups and the deep dislike of our leaders for each other will set the stage for war. Reports have surfaced that troops wearing the uniform of the elite Revolutionary Guard have been spotted within the Shiites ranks. If the war spreads and threatens US control of Iraq's northern oil fields I fully expect the Israeli card to be played. I must admit that this theory is pure speculation on my part. But after looking at a map of Iraq and the surrounding countries it appears possible to me as a worst case scenario option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.