Nah! I do not believe Kristol's rope a dope theory. I think the Bush policy is:

• Do and say whatever the last person you talked to wishes

• Don't do anything Clinton would've done.

-Will (feeling depressed and cynical)

I'm still sticking to my theory that the attack will come prior to the election. Bush has proved to be a hell of a lot more political than anybody thought, and I've become way more cynical that I ever thought.

You've both got it wrong. We're gearing up (I sure hope) for a very big fight, so big that having the acquiesence of the Saudis is going to be irrelevant. We can only win by doing something so massively overwhelming that it deeply shakes and indeed terrifies the Arab world.

Kristol is a weasel, and you *know* he doesn't have the least bit of the inside skinny on what is happening, unless maybe Dan Quayle's whispering in his ear.

I'm with SmailsKid on this. The coming pre-emptive strikes on Iraq's WMD sites will probably give Osama what he's sought all along: the decisive confrontation between civilization and pan-arabism.

Jordan, Kuwait and a few smallish emirates will stand to gain as the worst arab regimes meet the fate they so richly deserve. With a little luck, Iran will also take steps toward rejoining the civilized world.

Then the big questions are:
(1) how soon can we rid the western world of aQ sympathizers; and
(2) what of Pakistan?

On (1) there will always be aQ sympathizers, our goal is to make sure they are marginalized freaks. There were lots of fascist sympathizers before WW2, not too many afterwards. Total destruction brought by the USA followed by rebuilding will do the trick. But it requires total commitment by us, and no half-measures.

On (2), the whole dynamic of the region will change once we move.

SmailsKid wrote:

[T]he whole dynamic of the region will change once we move.

I sure hope you're right on both your posts. However we shouldn't underestimate Colin Powell's and other human speed bumps' potential for ruining a military victory with a political disaster. Hopefully he'll resign before the fighting starts.

That said I'm surprised that Powell's birthday isn't a national holiday in Iraq.

-Will (still depressed and cynical)

Stephen,

How come you consider Bill Kristol a weasal and amoral? I'm just curious. I tend to agree with him on foreign policy, trade and little else. He has no concern for individual rights that I can discern.

Robert

A politically motivated attack on Iraq just prior to the elections? Colin Powell throwing a wet rag on a campaign to topple Saddam? No, and no.

President Bush has displayed grace under pressure and clarity of thought. In fact, he has more than displayed it. He and his cabinet have shoved it in the faces of those who would conduct or sponsor attacks against us. The idea that Bush would "wag the dog" is an unfair accusation. Poll after poll have disabused the idiotic notion that the American people think that way.

But I join the rest in having trouble visualizing and predicting what the fuck is going to happen and when. My still, small voice wants to tell me our new friends the Russians will play a role.

This might get kinda longish, bear with me.

See, here's the thing: If rope-a-dope is, in fact, happening, we must all end up losing heart if Bush pulls it off just right. If we can still wink at each other and say oh, yeah, we're going after Iraq any time now, well, so can Iraq. That's no way to achieve much of an element of surprise.

Bush HAS to convince Saddam that no, we're not coming, we're just talking tough. Especially since we may have to go into Iraq without much of a buildup or staging operation (we're not getting much cooperation from Iraq's neighbors that I've seen). Tactical surprise will be very important if we're hanging it all out on the edge like that.

I keep reminding myself of this fact when I start to lose faith in Bush. If he does it right, I HAVE to lose faith. If I'm not convinced we're backing off, neither is our enemy.

Something else we all need to remember: Our military is actually very small, albeit more effective than any military ever. It takes time to get the logistics in place for major offensive operations, and we all know that Clinton depleted most of our Tomahawk inventory without budgeting to replace it. We need to "stock the shelves", and anyone that works inside of any manufacturing operation knows how hard it is to respond to rush orders in an era of Just In Time (JIT) manufacturing. Factor in that the production in question involves ultra-specialized low-volume components, and lead times go from weeks to months.

Back in spring, right after we pacified most of Afganistan, many of my friends were looking fo us to move on Iraq. I told them they were nuts, and predicted an August or September kickoff, with the prelude to war being a heavy US State Department emphasis on the WMD inspections, as agreed to by Iraq.

I stand by this prediction. I made it based on several factors, and those factors are just as valid today. First, you don't want a war in the Middle East in summer. That's asking for major logistics problems and numerous non-combat casualties. Second, as I've already said, we need to build up our inventory of expendables. We also need to beef up our troops (anyone read those stories about Special Forces changing their recruiting standards to accept younger guys?). Third, our carriers all need to rotate through home ports to refuel, refit, and rearm after Afganistan. If I'm right about not having much in the way of a nearby staging base for an Iraq invasion, we're going to need every last one of our carrier groups running at 100%.

The termination of inspections by Iraq is our legally acceptable, UN-sanctioned reason to go back in and take out the rest of the country (it's in the terms of surrender). While much of the world will bitch if we attack based on that, it's enough of a screen to blunt most of the whining. Besides, they'll come around eventually.

Here's your handy guide to the show we're all living in the middle of:

Act I: The Quiet Buildup.
Act II: The Justification.
Act III: War.

When you see the US finally start to talk toughto the UN about inspection of Iraq (and I mean with the vocal backing of Bush, not a few comments here and there), you'll know Act II is starting.

As a final proof, remember this: Bush is a politician. He's beat the war drums too hard already to back off now, and he's boosted Pentagon budgets too damned high not to make them earn that money. If he wants to have any hope at all of getting reelected, he needs to take out Iraq at the very least.