HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------

ROLLING START

The Idiot Prince Will Have His War

by Stan Goff

© Copyright 2003, From The Wilderness Publications, www.copvcia.com. All Rights 
Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for 
non-profit purposes only.

[FTW asked retired U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant Stan Goff to re-examine 
what we can expect on the battlefield when the United States begins its invasion. The 
former instructor of military science at West Point describes a scenario that is 
vastly different from what was expected last September before the Bush administration 
encountered effective economic and political opposition. Now denied the luxuries of a 
multi-front invasion from Turkey and Saudi Arabia the U.S. war strategy has changed. 
The bottom line is that a great many more innocent civilians are going to be killed. 
And the first and possibly crippling breakdown of U.S. plans will happen in Kurdestan. 
– MCR]

March 17, 2003, 1500 hrs PST (FTW) -- The full-scale, unilateral US invasion of Iraq 
appears – to many – to be imminent as this is written. In just hours President Bush is 
expected to give Saddam Hussein a 72-hour ultimatum to leave the country or else the 
bombs start falling. I have a reservation or two left about that, based partly on 
hope, but partly on the even riskier assumption that this administration realizes that 
it has miscalculated and that the consequences of invasion may now outweigh the risks 
– from their standpoint – of no invasion.

The Bush regime seems to have a clear understanding of what desperate straits they 
were in well before 9-11. The empire is in decline, and this means Americans will have 
to reconcile themselves to a new world in which their profligate lifestyle becomes a 
thing of the past.  Americans do not understand that this is an irremediable 
situation.  That is why we are witnessing the beginning of what is possibly the most 
dangerous period in human history.

If the administration decides miraculously in the next few days not to invade, the 
most unthinkable risks will recede significantly.  But this Junta has repeatedly 
displayed a reckless adventurist streak that alarms even their own political allies, 
and it appears that the hotter heads will prevail.

The actual tactical situation, never terribly auspicious because of the Kurdish wild 
card that receives far too little attention (and which I will address later), has 
deteriorated for the US.  The denial of a ground front from both Saudi Arabia and 
Turkey has completely reshuffled the tactical deck, and caused many a sleepless night 
for harried commanders from Task Force Headquarters all the way down to lonely 
infantry platoon leaders.

The ground attack will now go through Kuwait, a single front across which an 
unbelievable series of heavy, expensive, high-maintenance convoys will pass, many on 
long journeys to 18 provincial capitals, 19 military bases, 8 major oil fields, over 
1,000 miles of pipeline, key terrain along minority Shia and Kurdish regions, as well 
as Baghdad.  But attacking forces are not the only mechanized ground forces.

The huge logistical trains that must consolidate objectives, set up long-term lines of 
communication, and deliver daily support, will also be held up until airheads are 
seized within Iraq to augment ground transportation with airlifts of people and 
equipment.  This shifts a higher emphasis onto airhead seizures (and therefore Ranger 
units), and forces the security of the airheads themselves before they can become 
fully functional. 

Baghdad may require a siege, which has already been planned, but now that siege 
doesn’t begin without a much lengthier invasion timeline that depends much more 
heavily on airborne and airmobile forces that can be dropped onto key facilities to 
hold them until mechanized reinforcement can arrive.  At this writing, the 101st 
Airborne (which is actually a helicopter division) has not even completed its 
deployment into the region.  Sections of the 82nd Airborne (a genuine paratroop 
division) are still occupying Afghanistan.

The increased dependence on airlift is further complicated by weather.  While extreme 
summer heat doesn’t reach Iraq until May, the pre-summer sand storms have already 
begun.  US commanders have pooh-poohed the effect of these storms, but they are simply 
putting on a brave face for the public.  Sand can be a terrible enemy.  It clogs 
engine intakes, just as it clogs eyes and noses, gathers in the folds of skin, falls 
in food, works its way into every conceivable piece of equipment, and takes a 
miserable toll on materiel, machinery and troops.  When air operations become more 
critical to overall mission accomplishment, and when light forces (like airmobile and 
airborne divisions) are operating independent of heavier mechanized logistics, weather 
like sand storms matters...a lot.

The order of battle is widely available on the web, and there's no reason to recount 
it here.  The reason is, even with all these debilities and setbacks, the results of 
the invasion are certain.  Iraq will be militarily defeated and occupied.  There will 
be no sustained Iraqi guerrilla resistance.  There will be no Stalingrad in Baghdad.  
We should not buy into the US bluster about their invincibility, but neither should we 
buy into Iraqi bluster.

Last September retired Marine General Paul Van Riper was selected to play the Opposing 
Forces (OPFOR) Commander named Saddam Hussein for a 3-week-long, computer simulated 
invasion of Iraq, called Operation Millennium Challenge.

He defeated the entire multi-billion-dollar US electronic warfare intelligence 
apparatus by sending messages via motorcycle-mounted couriers to organize the 
preemptive destruction of sixteen US ships, using pleasure vessels.  At that point, 
the exercise controllers repeatedly intervened and told him what to do; move these 
defenders off the beach.  Stop giving out commands from mosque loudspeakers.  Turn on 
your radar so our planes can see you.  Because every time Van Riper was left to his 
own devices, he was defeating the US.

While all this is surely amusing, does it really mean the Iraqis will defeat the US 
during an invasion?

Certainly not.  It will, however, make it far more expensive, slow, difficult, and 
deadly for Iraqis.

The Iraqi military won't prevail because they can't. They are weak, under-resourced, 
poorly led, and demoralized.  What the delays mean is that the US will depend on 
sustaining the initiative and momentum through brutal, incessant bombing designed to 
destroy every soldier, every installation, every vehicle, every field kitchen in the 
Iraqi military.

War will inflict terrifying casualties on the Iraqi military.  There will be 
collateral damage to civilians, even with attempts to attenuate that damage, and in 
case we fail to remember, soldiers are like everyone else. They have families and 
loved ones.

What is uncertain is the aftermath.

This is the variable that is never factored into the thinking of our native political 
lumpen-bourgeoisie; their deeds plant the seeds of future and furious resistance.

If half million Iraqi soldiers die, and 100,000 civilians are killed in collateral 
damage, we have to remember that there are at least (for the sake of argument) five 
people who intensely love each of the dead.  And if we think of the grief of millions 
after this slaughter, and of the conversion of that grief into rage, and combine that 
with the organization of the internecine struggles based on historical ethnic fault 
lines (that the Ba'ath Party has repressed), we begin to appreciate the explosive 
complexity of post-invasion Iraq.

This invasion will also ignite the fires of Arab and Muslim humiliation and anger 
throughout the region.

Most importantly, in my view, there are the Kurds.

Anyone who has followed the news has heard about "Saddam's" gassing of the Kurds.  
That's how it is portrayed.  Nonetheless, few people have bothered to find out what 
the truth is, or even to investigate this claim.

Stephen Pelletiere was the Central Intelligence Agency's senior political analyst on 
Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war.  He was also a professor at the Army War College from 
1988 to 2000.  In both roles, he had access to classified material from Washington 
related to the Persian Gulf.  In 1991, he headed an Army investigation into Iraqi 
military capability. That classified report went into great detail on Halabja.

Halabja is the Kurdish town where hundreds of people were apparently poisoned in a 
chemical weapons attack in March 1988.  Few Americans even knew that much.  They only 
have the article of religious faith, "Saddam gassed his own people."

In fact, according to Pelletiere – an ex-CIA analyst, and hardly a raging leftist like 
yours truly – the gassing occurred in the midst of a battle between Iraqi and Iranian 
armed forces.

Pelletiere further notes that a "need to know" document that circulated around the US 
Defense Intelligence Agency indicated that US intelligence doesn't believe it was 
Iraqi chemical munitions that killed and aimed the Kurdish residents of Halabja.  It 
was Iranian. The condition of the bodies indicated cyanide-based poisoning. The Iraqis 
were using mustard gas in that battle. The Iranians used cyanide.

The lack of public critical scrutiny of this and virtually all current events is also 
evident on the issue of the Kurds themselves.

That issue will come out into the open, with the vast area that is Kurdistan, with its 
insurgent armed bodies, overlaying Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and even parts of Syria, which 
will realign the politics and military of the entire region in yet unpredictable ways.

As part of the effort to generate an Iraqi opposition, the US has permitted Northern 
Iraqi Kurdistan to exercise a strong element of national political autonomy since the 
1991 war. This is a double-edged sword for the US in its current war preparations, 
particularly given this administration’s predisposition for pissing all over its 
closest allies. Iraq's Northern border is with Turkey, who has for years favored the 
interests of its own Turkmens in Southern Turkish Kurdistan at the expense of the 
Kurds, who have waged a guerrilla war for self-determination against the Turks since 
the 1970s. 

The Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan or PKK) (Kurdish Worker's Party), Turkish Kurds 
fighting for an independent Kurdish state in southeast Turkey, was singled out on the 
US international terrorist organization list several years ago, in deference to fellow 
NATO member, Turkey.  PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan is so popular with the Kurds that 
Turkey was forced to commute his death sentence, subsequent to his capture, to life 
imprisonment, for fear that his execution would spark an uprising.

Other non-leftist Kurdish independence organizations developed and alternatively 
allied with and split with the PKK and each other. Turkey now claims that PKK bases 
are being constructed in Iran, with Iranian complicity, from which to launch strikes 
against Southern Turkey. Groups other than the PKK, more acceptable to the US, 
predominantly the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Kurdistan Patriotic Union 
(PUK) have been administering Northern Iraqi Kurdistan as an autonomous zone under the 
protective umbrella of the US no-fly zone. The Turkish government fears the influence 
of this section of Kurdistan in the wake of a US military action that topples Saddam 
Hussein’s Ba'ath government, because Kurds have declared their intention of declaring 
an independent Kurdish state there. The Turks find this absolutely unacceptable, and 
have declared forthrightly they will invade to prevent this happening. They have also 
threatened to attack Kurds in Iran, but this is a far less credible threat.

Kurdish nationalists have long experience with betrayals and alliances of convenience, 
and know American perfidy very well. They have declared at the outset that in the 
event of an invasion, they will defend themselves from Turkish incursions. They are 
not willing to lose the autonomy they have gained over the last eleven years in 
Northern Iraq. This not only puts them at odds with US ally Turkey, it potentially 
puts them at odds with the US itself, even with US wishes that they participate in 
indigenous actions against Iraqi forces. The US does not want that region destabilized 
in the post-invasion period, because Kirkuk in the East of Iraqi Kurdistan is a huge 
oil producing zone.

The very first complication of post-invasion Iraq will likely be the demand that US 
commanders disarm the Kurds.

Northern Iraq could easily become contested terrain involving partisan warfare between 
Turks, Kurds of three factions, the Iranians, and the US, with the Syrians in a 
position to play the silent interloper. This would amount to the devolution of 
Northern Iraq, a key strategic region, into another Afghanistan or Somalia. It is 
already straining relationships between Turkey and the United States, NATO allies, 
even as the NATO alliance itself comes under severe strain, with a Euro-American trade 
war as a backdrop.

And the Kurds have the motivation, tenacity, and fighting spirit to do those kinds of 
things that General Van Riper did to defeat the Rumsfeld "Robo-Military" in Operation 
Millennium Challenge.

We begin to see how the Bush Junta is the equivalent of a mad bee keeper, that no 
longer leaves the hive stable and merely smokes it into a stupor to harvest the honey. 
It now proposes to simply start swatting all the bees and taking the honey by brute 
force.

We cannot see the war as an extricable, external phenomenon. We have to see it as it 
is embedded in the larger complexities of the whole period. When the cruise missiles 
fly at 400 per day, that is 400 times $1.3 million in self-destructing technology. 30 
days of this is $15.6 billion in Cruise missiles alone. This is great news for 
Raytheon and Lockheed-Martin, but it is bad news for public schools.  At the antiwar 
demonstration in Washington DC, March 15th, I met many more teachers, now wearing 
buttons that said "money for education not war." This is a reflection of the deepening 
consciousness of the American people, but one that has not yet grasped the depth of 
the crisis that drives the war. Nor does it measure how every missile’s impact 
increases the rage of the Southwestern Asian masses and the justifiable anxieties of 
Africa and East Asia.

The real bet that Bush & Co. make on this war is that it can secure oil at $15 a 
barrel, rescue dollar hegemony, gain the ability to wage its economic war on China and 
Europe, and inaugurate a fresh upwave of real profit. That will not happen.

When the invasion goes, we will certainly see plenty of images of cheering "liberated" 
Iraqis. This is common after any successful military incursion, a combination of real 
relief in some cases, as we saw in the first stage of the 1994 Haiti invasion, but 
also of self-defense and opportunism.

The costs incurred by the war, combined with the insane Bush tax cuts for the rich, 
will deepen the Bush regime’s economic conundrums. The coming social crisis in the US 
will emerge against a backdrop of elevated public expectations.  The hyperbole 
employed by this administration to justify this war, against rapidly strengthening 
resistance and a corresponding loss of credibility outside the indoctrinated and 
gullible United States, led them to warn the public about perpetual "war on terror," 
but with the sugar coating that there would be no domestic economic sacrifice. The 
mountain of personal and institutional debt in the US, the threat of deflation, the 
trade deficit, the overcapacity, the rising unemployment and insecurity, all these 
factors will be worsened by the Bush doctrines. And Bush, like his father before him, 
will go down. Along with him, Tony Blair and Jose Maria Aznar will go down in 
political flames, and it will be a long time indeed before anyone can align themselves 
with the US as an ally. As in the last elections for the Republic of Korea, candidates 
will find that election victory depends on now independent one can prove oneself of 
the United States.

We have had our course charted now, and the military option is all the US ruling class 
really has to maintain its dominance. After Iraq, there will certainly be increased 
asymmetric warfa) 

---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.bdn7KI.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
==^================================================================

Reply via email to