Posted July 13, 2002

Calculating Nuclear War

[Regarding Alan Bock's column, "Iraqi Warmonger Complications":]

It would seem the Kurds have (finally) learned the hard way what it means to be an "ally" in one of the USG's little wars. After you get hung out to dry a couple of times, you figure out what it really means when you are told, "We're here to help you." The two classic cases in point are what happened to the Czechs when they revolted against the Soviet Union and the Cuban patriots at the Bay of Pigs, right in our own backyard. They are abandoned to the slaughter after promises of support to get them to do our dirty work for us.

One important point is missed in this article though. Bock is correct to point out that our forces would be stretched dangerously thin and many tens of thousands of American troops would be put in harms way. He is also correct to point out that Saddam could be cornered into using whatever WMD he does possess to defend himself. This is a significant part of the reason the USG's nuclear posture has been changed to allow for "first use" in the event of "surprising military developments". Surprising does not mean unforeseen. The USG is calculating nuclear war! They are now arrogant beyond comprehension.

~ N.O., US Navy

Something 'Stupid'

It's no secret that Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, Bush and Cheney are eager to use military force in an effort to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Their problem lies in garnering support from the rest of the world and many Americans.

I'm not sure if the leaks about the supposed plan to attack Iraq are an attempt to get Saddam to do something stupid and commit the first overt act as FDR would put it, or were used by the military leaders to dissent, or an attempt to squelch any chance of the UN-sponsored arms inspection. The latter sounds the most reasonable but it doesn't solve the problem for the hawks. Could the anthrax scare have been an attempt to scare Americans into supporting the war against Saddam? What are they doing to engineer consent for a war against Saddam? I'm going to be extremely skeptical about any "news" dealing with Iraq doing something "stupid." I can only imagine Saddam is highly aware that most of the world does not support the hawks and if he can keep his nose clean it will help him survive, so for him to do something rash wouldn't be in his best interest.

~ Jeromy M.

Covert Ops

[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column "9/11 – Revised Edition":]

...As soon as I saw those attacks, I knew Afghanistan was going to be attacked. Not because I'm psychic, but because I'd been aware of US (and British) covert operations in that region for some years. Zbigniew Brzezinski (one of the most influential figures in US foreign policy -- Trilateral Commission founder, CFR member etc.) largely spells out the current war in one of his books.

...One thing I can say with virtual certainty -- Israel didn't do it. (I will soon email the www.whatreallyhappened.com guy with this same message.) They were one of the countries which warned the US. What seems likely is that Israel is using the fact that the US government did nothing to blackmail the Bush administration into supporting their infamies against the Palestinians. (As an aside -- I speculate that the global political tide will turn sharply against Israel in the near future, probably with deadly consequences.) ...

Anyway, congratulations on an otherwise excellent website.

~ ZB, Australia

Policy

Bush has said it would be a safer world without Hussein. What a joke.

It would be one hell of a lot safer world without Bush. This guy is Daddy's retarded son playing war. That's usually not a problem but in this case he has command of real weapons. It's ironic that school kids are arrested for pointing fingers as gun barrels or for drawing guns on paper while this irresponsible, burnout dolt bombs the hell out of any country his dart hits on the map (so long as there is oil profit in it). Meanwhile, Bush is so isolated from reality it is doubtful he even understands what he does to others, much like children at play.

It is obvious, to those who think, that the "errant" bombing the US Air force consistently accomplishes, is not errant at all but deliberate policy from on high. This sort of tactic began in earnest by the allies ("Bomber" Harris of England being the main proponent, with Churchill) in World War II with the firebombings of German cities full of nonmilitary women, children and old men. The object is to demoralize the militants into believing there is no use continuing since all they are defending is being destroyed anyway. How many times can the media excuse these "mistakes" without any of them catching on to the real reason for these constant "unfortunate tragedies" committed by supposedly the world's best trained military?

~ Tony B.

Editorial Content

As a longtime Antiwar.com reader, and professional Chinese translator interested in peace issues regarding China, I am increasingly dissatisfied with Mr. Matuszak's column. The latest one was the last straw.

Antiwar.com, as the name implies, is a storehouse of anti-war news and views. Mr. Matuszak's column was nothing more than a well-written piece on AIDS in China. And while perfectly publication worthy on its own, should fall outside the editorial content of this site. ...

~ Tim H., Illinois

Iowa / Blind Patriotism

I am a youth from the middle of Iowa. I am surrounded by blind patriotism here and it disgusts me. I would like to thank you for revealing the truth. I know all about the corruption of the United States. It is hidden within almost every industry here, but I'm sure you already knew that. Anyway, thank you for using your brains and making the world better.

~ Eric H.

Public Opinion in Iowa

What do the latest polls say about invading Iraq? The last poll I saw had only 48% of US in favor of invading Iraq. Now it still must be low or the media would be blowing it all over the place otherwise. Speaking of polls, don't we need at least a 90% public opinion in favor of an invasion to have any success at all? We don't have that here in Iowa the heartland, I'll tell you that. I strongly believe the Bush war hawks have a major problem here.

They don't know how to lead and no one is willing to follow their foolish notions.

~ JL