The Riskiest War in our History -- Baghdad access like Boston's Sumner tunnel

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Audacious Mission, Awesome Risks

By Rick Atkinson and Thomas E. Ricks

Sunday, March 16, 2003; Page A01


CAMP NEW JERSEY, Kuwait, March 15 -- With a force only one-third the size of
the one that liberated Kuwait 12 years ago, U.S. commanders poised to attack
Iraq have been given a far more ambitious mission: March hundreds of miles
to Baghdad, neutralize the Iraqi military, overthrow President Saddam
Hussein and then prevent a country the size of California from
disintegrating into chaos.

The war plan they have devised to do all this is by most accounts
innovative, even daring. "We literally could be in Baghdad in three or four
days," said one general here in the field. "How audacious do you want to
be?"

But those qualities also make this mission riskier than other recent U.S.
military operations. Retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, a former chief of
the Central Command, the U.S. military headquarters for the Middle East,
noted that danger is "what comes with being bold and audacious."

The aspects of the operation that most worry planners here, and Pentagon
insiders and experts in the United States, are the emphasis on lightning,
simultaneous operations that could result in "friendly fire" incidents; the
dependence on a 350-mile supply line; and the heavy reliance on Special
Operations troops behind enemy lines. Overhanging the entire operation is
the prospect that Iraq could use chemical or biological weapons. The other
major fear is that U.S. forces could be bogged down in an urban battle that
could turn Baghdad into a modern Stalingrad -- a possibility that has
resulted in some troops here being issued battle axes and battering rams.

Commanders and planners here stay up to the small hours of the morning,
every morning, refining ways to achieve their goals with as few casualties
as possible. The challenges are enormous, the opportunities rife for
misfortune, even disaster. "There are a thousand 'what-ifs' going through
your mind," said the general in the field.

<snip>

Some in the military calculate that Hussein and his government are likely to
fall long before U.S. tanks roll into the capital. But others say it is a
possibility, albeit remote, that urban warfare drags on. Keep in mind,
warned one Senate staff member who is an expert in security issues, that the
U.S. military could wind up in Iraq "for a long time, maybe fighting a
low-level insurgency."

Increasing the chances of that outcome is that senior Iraqi leaders have
little incentive to surrender. "They know they'll be facing tribunals,"
noted retired Marine Lt. Col. Thomas C. Linn, who served in northern Iraq in
1991.

But perhaps the riskiest aspect of the current plan is the character and
aims of the war itself, said retired Air Force Col. John Warden, an
architect of the air campaign in the Gulf War.

"The plan is probably one of the most risky in our history as it launches us
off into terra incognita for the U.S.: our first preemptive or preventive
war; our first attempt to democratize an Islamic state; and establishment of
a very narrow beachhead in the midst of a billion undefeated Muslims," he
said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30774-2003Mar15.html


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/