Franklin planner notation, early 2003: Declare war on Iraq

Great Debates
1

Regarding this news, I can’t help but wonder if we might be opening up a whole new can of worms in the terrorist world.

While the measure seems to have broad bi-partisan support, I can’t help but think that this is insanity. I’m all for Saddam losing his job in the near future, but do we really want to attack Iraq to accomplish this? I watched his birthday celebration and it sure seems like he has some fans. While you might say these people were forced into celebrating, how does one force millions of people into the streets, put smiles on their faces, and make them clap?

I understand that it is quite possible that the other Arab nations will sit on their hands and do nothing in response, but that doesn’t mean that many Arab people won’t be pissed about this. Will this simply be a motivating factor for the next batch of terrorists?

Maybe I’m missing something here, so feel free to share with my why this is a good thing.

2

Well, what exactly are you quibbling about? Whether we should attack Iraq, or whether we should put it off until 2003?

And if you’re all for Saddam “losing his job”, what other way do you suggest to get him out of Baghdad besides declaring war on him? It’s not like we can fire him. Or maybe we could deliberately hurt his feelings by letting him find out that we didn’t attend his birthday party, and then he’d go stomping off to Libya or Paris in disgust…“Well, what’s the point of being a World Leader anyway, if people aren’t even going to come to your parties?”

And why am I flashing on Prince Humperdink?

“Tyrone, you know how much I love watching you work, but I’ve got my country’s 500th anniversary to plan, my wedding to arrange, my wife to murder, and Gilder to frame for it. I’m swamped!”

Heh. :smiley:

3

One would assume that Joe Stalin and Chairman Mao might have helped you out with an answer to this one. :wink:

4

Both, actually. I’m still not convinced this is a good thing.

I’m all for Le Pen losing his job if he somehow wins, but I’m certainly not prepared to back up a US decision to attack France if that happens.

I guess what I’m trying to understand is what grounds are we using for the attack, whether it’s today or next year? I do think that openly planning a future war with someone sounds a bit ridiculous, in a “Get your troops all bunkered up, we’ll be crossing the Kuwaiti border into Iraq on January 12th”, sort of way.

If it’s his civil rights violations, I can think of many nations we should start prepping to attack. If it’s the fact that he isn’t particularly welcoming to US inspection teams, it seems like Israel had best get prepared for our wrath. If it’s just a matter of us not liking the way he does things, it seems like Cuba (and numerous other countries) should have been decimated a long time ago.

I guess I could rephrase the OP to simply ask “Why are we attacking Iraq, specifically?”

5

Didn’t large portions of Russia and China admire them both?

6

If you want another contemporary example of this phenomenon, look only to the Beloved Leader Kim Jong Il, who is ‘ardently worshiped’ by his people.

Too funny for words.

Hey, I’ve finally made a connection between Iraq and North Korea. Maybe the Axis of Evil does exist after all :rolleyes:

7

Am I the only one who thinks that it is really really strange to announce invasion plans in advance? I suppose it is considered an application of pressure, but I can envision a lot of scenarios where it is a big mistake, and none where it is a real advantage. I have this vision of Saddam watching TV, hearing: “We’re going to invade on such and such a date” and thinking: “That gives me some real motivation for mass production of the suitcase nukes!”
Did the headlines in December 1943 read: “Big Invasion Planned Early Next June in the North of France?”
JDM

8

The thing is, the US pre-invasion buildup would be impossible to conceal. We would have to get permission from Turkey, Kuwait, or Saudi, we would have to build camps, ammo and fuel dumps, airfields, etc. Essentially the Gulf War buildup part deux. You can’t hide something like that, so strategic surprise is impossible. Of course they aren’t going to announce the exact day of the invasion, but unless we are talking about massive airstrikes with no ground assault it isn’t going to be a surprise that an attack is coming in the next few days or weeks. And that isn’t going to cause a regime change. Without a ground assault the whole thing is pointless. And before we send in the armor and infantry we are going to be doing a lot of bombing. I imagine repeated B-52 strikes at Iraq’s infrastructure is going to tip Saddam off that something is up.

9

U.S. AGAIN APOLOGIZES FOR ACCIDENTAL RELEASE OF BOMBS OVER IRAQ
49th Straight Day of “Regrettable Pilot Errors”
250,000 U.S. Troops In Kuwait on Humanitarian Mission, “Operation Pass Out Cuddly Teddy Bears to Kuwaiti Orphans”

10

Saddam can get millions to ‘cheer’ for him because he has built up one of the most frightening and paranoid security establishments ever seen. Seriously, the lengths he has gone to are probably even greater than those under Stalin and other despots.

Not only does Saddam’s security apparatus spy on people, but it actively recruits informers, who then go around doing things like complaining about Saddam and seeing who they can get to agree. When people are found that agree with the complaints, they are arrested and often murdered. If the complaints are particularly harsh, their entire family is murdered.

One person who defected from Iraq was sent a video tape from Saddam showing family members being raped at gunpoint. This is not just pure sadism, but this helps restrain others who might think of defecting.

The Iraqi military is organized into rings of increasing closeness to Saddam, with his most trusted people closest to him, and lesser trustees at lower levels. There are infiltrators from each level into others who report back to Saddam.

There have been a number of ‘coup attempts’ which turned out to be engineered by Saddam in order to shake out disloyal members of his military and security apparatus. Mass executions of disloyal officers follow.

The security apparatus also arrests people at random and ‘turns’ them into informants by threatening them and their families. These people are then sent back into the community to report dissent, or even to cause dissent and report on those who do not defend Saddam.

Here’s an example: Saddam’s personal architect was at a party, where some other people were talking about architecture and plying him with liquor. They were trading stories about building construction, and the topic got around to some of the details of Saddam’s residence. The architect said a little too much about the layout of the place, and was subsequently arrested and executed. It turned out that the people chatting with him were security agents who were intentionally trying to get the guy to reveal secrets about palace construction.

Under a system like that, if Saddam says, “I want all the people who love me to appear in the streets and cheer”, would YOU stay home???

11

Didn’t the U.S Gov. stop using Franklin Planners when Franklin joined up with Covey weirdo?

I think the use Outlook, or Day Planner’s.

So, if you saw it in a Franklin Planner it’s gotta be a fraud.

12

**Saddam violated the terms of his peace agreement by not letting UN inspectors in. He also presumably violated the peace agreement by developing weaons of mass destruction.

We want Saddam out of power before Iraq acquires nuclear capability.

13

Lets not be too hasty about this. France has a lot to recommend it as a potential international butt-boy. We still have the maps! And, after all, its France! Aside from the invention of oral sex, the French have contributed little, (deconstruction, existentialism, and attitude.)

With any other modern military power, a year long warning of intent would be risky. With France we can publish our itinerary in People and still hit the schedule. After all, Von Moltke did exactly that.

There would be no risk of European interference, aside from a few muted dissents. The French annoy the entire continent so much so that througout European history, somebody always eventually gets pissed enough to beat the living snot out of the French. Usually its the Germans.

On the other hand, Canada is closer and has vast strategic reserves of whale blubber…