Monday, July 29, 2002
U.S. Exploring Baghdad Strike As Iraq Option
U.S. Exploring Baghdad Strike As Iraq Option
By DAVID E. SANGER AND THOM SHANKER (NYT)
FOREIGN DESK | July 29, 2002, Monday
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 5
As the Bush administration considers its military options for deposing Saddam Hussein, senior administration and Pentagon officials say they are exploring a new if risky approach: take Baghdad and one or two key command centers and weapons depots first, in hopes of cutting off the country's leadership and causing a...
By DAVID E. SANGER AND THOM SHANKER (NYT)
FOREIGN DESK | July 29, 2002, Monday
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 5
As the Bush administration considers its military options for deposing Saddam Hussein, senior administration and Pentagon officials say they are exploring a new if risky approach: take Baghdad and one or two key command centers and weapons depots first, in hopes of cutting off the country's leadership and causing a...
Wednesday, July 10, 2002
U.S. Considers Wary Jordan As Base for an Attack on Iraq
U.S. Considers Wary Jordan As Base for an Attack on Iraq
By ERIC SCHMITT (NYT) words
FOREIGN DESK | July 10, 2002, Wednesday
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 1
DISPLAYING FIRST 50 OF WORDS - American military planners are considering using bases in Jordan to stage air and commando operations against Iraq in the event the United States decides to attack Iraq, senior defense officials said today. ... But Jordan has not yet been consulted specifically about the possible use of its bases, and Jordanian...
By ERIC SCHMITT (NYT) words
FOREIGN DESK | July 10, 2002, Wednesday
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 1
DISPLAYING FIRST 50 OF WORDS - American military planners are considering using bases in Jordan to stage air and commando operations against Iraq in the event the United States decides to attack Iraq, senior defense officials said today. ... But Jordan has not yet been consulted specifically about the possible use of its bases, and Jordanian...
Friday, July 05, 2002
White House downplays Iraq invasion report
White House downplays Iraq invasion report
July 5, 2002 Posted: 7:36 PM EDT (2336 GMT)
From Kelly Wallace
CNN Washington Bureau
KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine (CNN) -- The Bush administration refused comment Friday on a reported preliminary plan to attack Iraq, saying it never comments on military plans.
"We don't comment on military plans or military planning," a senior administration official told CNN.
According to a report in Friday's New York Times, the U.S. military has put together a preliminary planning document that calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack Iraq. The assault would involve tens of thousands of U.S. Marines and soldiers, the newspaper reported.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer dismissed as speculation any notion the report is significant.
"The Pentagon engages in contingency planning of all types all around the world," Fleischer told reporters en route to Kennebunkport, Maine, where President Bush is spending the weekend with his family.
Bush has made it clear he is keeping all options on the table, including a military assault, to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein from power.
"Our position with respect to Iraq and the Iraqi regime is well known," a senior aide said.
About three weeks ago, Bush repeated he had no war plans on his desk. The senior aide said that remains the case today.
News of this report came on the same day the United Nations failed to reach an agreement with Iraq which would allow U.N. weapons inspectors to re-enter the country.
The United States has said that U.N. weapons inspectors must have unfettered access to the country, the senior aide told CNN.
"Inspectors are a means to an end, not an end itself," the official said, adding that the administration's goal is making sure Hussein does not possess or build weapons of mass destruction.
Bush arrived in Kennebunkport early Friday for a four-day visit to his family's stone and brick compound, called Walker's Point. He will celebrate his 56th birthday Saturday and return to the White House on Monday afternoon.
July 5, 2002 Posted: 7:36 PM EDT (2336 GMT)
From Kelly Wallace
CNN Washington Bureau
KENNEBUNKPORT, Maine (CNN) -- The Bush administration refused comment Friday on a reported preliminary plan to attack Iraq, saying it never comments on military plans.
"We don't comment on military plans or military planning," a senior administration official told CNN.
According to a report in Friday's New York Times, the U.S. military has put together a preliminary planning document that calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack Iraq. The assault would involve tens of thousands of U.S. Marines and soldiers, the newspaper reported.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer dismissed as speculation any notion the report is significant.
"The Pentagon engages in contingency planning of all types all around the world," Fleischer told reporters en route to Kennebunkport, Maine, where President Bush is spending the weekend with his family.
Bush has made it clear he is keeping all options on the table, including a military assault, to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein from power.
"Our position with respect to Iraq and the Iraqi regime is well known," a senior aide said.
About three weeks ago, Bush repeated he had no war plans on his desk. The senior aide said that remains the case today.
News of this report came on the same day the United Nations failed to reach an agreement with Iraq which would allow U.N. weapons inspectors to re-enter the country.
The United States has said that U.N. weapons inspectors must have unfettered access to the country, the senior aide told CNN.
"Inspectors are a means to an end, not an end itself," the official said, adding that the administration's goal is making sure Hussein does not possess or build weapons of mass destruction.
Bush arrived in Kennebunkport early Friday for a four-day visit to his family's stone and brick compound, called Walker's Point. He will celebrate his 56th birthday Saturday and return to the White House on Monday afternoon.
US maps out Iraq invasion
US maps out Iraq invasion
Friday, 5 July, 2002, 16:04 GMT 17:04 UK
BBC News
A document leaked to the New York Times has detailed the logistics of a possible all-out invasion of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
The BBC's defence correspondent, Jonathan Marcus, reports.
The US Central Command document cited in this report is not a final war plan - rather a concept of operations.
It sets out in broad terms what the battle to topple Saddam Hussein might look like and, once approved, it would form the basis for much more detailed planning.
The US military seem to be envisaging a sort of Desert Storm II - similar in some ways to the original Gulf War which drove Iraqi forces from Kuwait.
This would be a vast operation involving a concerted air, sea and land assault from the north, the south, and the west - according to a report in the New York Times.
Complex operation
The report quotes a source who is familiar with the planning under way at US Central Command in Florida - the headquarters that would oversee preparations for any such operation.
The plan proposes a full-scale invasion of Iraq involving tens of thousands of marines and soldiers supported by hundreds of warplanes operating from bases in a variety of countries.
This is in some ways a more complex operation than the original eviction of Iraqi forces from Kuwait - an operation the Iraqi leader famously dubbed the "mother of all battles".
But the strategic options in terms of avenues of attack are much greater and the Americans clearly intend to overwhelm Iraq's defences by a well co-ordinated attack from a variety of directions.
One would expect the operation to open with a significant air campaign just as in the first Desert Storm.
Nonetheless, there are some important embellishments.
Political context
The possibility that Iraq still has chemical or biological weapons ready for use in a last-ditch defence worries American planners.
So the US attack would be accompanied by covert operations on the ground inside Iraq to try to destroy laboratories or storage sites.
One factor that is not seemingly addressed in any detail is the wider political context of any operation.
Such large-scale military activity would require months of preparation and the co-operation of a number of countries in the region that would have to provide staging bases from which the attack would be mounted.
It is also unclear if this is seen as essentially a US operation - perhaps with one or two key allies - or whether there is to be a credible military contribution from a wider coalition.
Such a coalition is far from essential in military terms but could well have some diplomatic value.
Military dissatisfaction
This is certainly a rare glimpse into the inner thinking of America's military planners.
But it prompts the question as to why this sort of detailed planning has emerged into the public domain at all.
One factor may be the Bush administration's own desire to keep the pressure up on Saddam Hussein - a demonstration that President George W Bush's threats to unseat the Iraqi leader are not mere empty rhetoric.
But there are also hints that the leaking of the report reflects some dissatisfaction within the US military.
There is a feeling that more than a decade after the first Desert Storm, while the US has become stronger and Iraq dramatically weaker, the Pentagon's war plans still betray too traditional a form of strategic thinking.
There is a faction in the military world which argues that the advances in technology over the past 10 years mean that American planners should be able to devise a much more innovative and elegant battle-plan.
No 'Afghan option'
But the military options for Washington if it is serious about unseating Saddam are probably limited.
There is no real "Afghan option" - the use of special forces in concert with well-motivated local opponents of the regime such as the Northern Alliance.
However, few people doubt that the US could invade Iraq and topple its rulers.
The real question remains: What then?
Re-building Iraq both politically and in practical terms would be a huge task.
And while America may fight the war largely on its own, it would need the concerted help of all the major economic powers to set about the task of creating a new Iraq once Saddam's military machine was crushed.
Friday, 5 July, 2002, 16:04 GMT 17:04 UK
BBC News
A document leaked to the New York Times has detailed the logistics of a possible all-out invasion of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
The BBC's defence correspondent, Jonathan Marcus, reports.
The US Central Command document cited in this report is not a final war plan - rather a concept of operations.
It sets out in broad terms what the battle to topple Saddam Hussein might look like and, once approved, it would form the basis for much more detailed planning.
The US military seem to be envisaging a sort of Desert Storm II - similar in some ways to the original Gulf War which drove Iraqi forces from Kuwait.
This would be a vast operation involving a concerted air, sea and land assault from the north, the south, and the west - according to a report in the New York Times.
Complex operation
The report quotes a source who is familiar with the planning under way at US Central Command in Florida - the headquarters that would oversee preparations for any such operation.
The plan proposes a full-scale invasion of Iraq involving tens of thousands of marines and soldiers supported by hundreds of warplanes operating from bases in a variety of countries.
This is in some ways a more complex operation than the original eviction of Iraqi forces from Kuwait - an operation the Iraqi leader famously dubbed the "mother of all battles".
But the strategic options in terms of avenues of attack are much greater and the Americans clearly intend to overwhelm Iraq's defences by a well co-ordinated attack from a variety of directions.
One would expect the operation to open with a significant air campaign just as in the first Desert Storm.
Nonetheless, there are some important embellishments.
Political context
The possibility that Iraq still has chemical or biological weapons ready for use in a last-ditch defence worries American planners.
So the US attack would be accompanied by covert operations on the ground inside Iraq to try to destroy laboratories or storage sites.
One factor that is not seemingly addressed in any detail is the wider political context of any operation.
Such large-scale military activity would require months of preparation and the co-operation of a number of countries in the region that would have to provide staging bases from which the attack would be mounted.
It is also unclear if this is seen as essentially a US operation - perhaps with one or two key allies - or whether there is to be a credible military contribution from a wider coalition.
Such a coalition is far from essential in military terms but could well have some diplomatic value.
Military dissatisfaction
This is certainly a rare glimpse into the inner thinking of America's military planners.
But it prompts the question as to why this sort of detailed planning has emerged into the public domain at all.
One factor may be the Bush administration's own desire to keep the pressure up on Saddam Hussein - a demonstration that President George W Bush's threats to unseat the Iraqi leader are not mere empty rhetoric.
But there are also hints that the leaking of the report reflects some dissatisfaction within the US military.
There is a feeling that more than a decade after the first Desert Storm, while the US has become stronger and Iraq dramatically weaker, the Pentagon's war plans still betray too traditional a form of strategic thinking.
There is a faction in the military world which argues that the advances in technology over the past 10 years mean that American planners should be able to devise a much more innovative and elegant battle-plan.
No 'Afghan option'
But the military options for Washington if it is serious about unseating Saddam are probably limited.
There is no real "Afghan option" - the use of special forces in concert with well-motivated local opponents of the regime such as the Northern Alliance.
However, few people doubt that the US could invade Iraq and topple its rulers.
The real question remains: What then?
Re-building Iraq both politically and in practical terms would be a huge task.
And while America may fight the war largely on its own, it would need the concerted help of all the major economic powers to set about the task of creating a new Iraq once Saddam's military machine was crushed.
U.S. PLAN FOR IRAQ IS SAID TO INCLUDE ATTACK ON 3 SIDES
U.S. PLAN FOR IRAQ IS SAID TO INCLUDE ATTACK ON 3 SIDES
By ERIC SCHMITT (NYT) words
FOREIGN DESK | July 5, 2002, Friday
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 5
An American military planning document calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack Iraq from three directions -- the north, south and west -- in a campaign to topple President Saddam Hussein, according to a person familiar with the document. ... The document envisions tens of thousands of marines...
By ERIC SCHMITT (NYT) words
FOREIGN DESK | July 5, 2002, Friday
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 5
An American military planning document calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack Iraq from three directions -- the north, south and west -- in a campaign to topple President Saddam Hussein, according to a person familiar with the document. ... The document envisions tens of thousands of marines...
U.S. Plan Calls for Massive Offensive on Iraq
U.S. Plan Calls for Massive Offensive on Iraq
ABC News
July 5, 2002
N E W Y O R K, A draft U.S. military plan for an invasion of Iraq is said to envision a multi-pronged attack with tens of thousands of Marines and soldiers probably invading from Kuwait, The New York Times reported today.
Citing a person familiar with the document, the newspaper said the highly classified plan calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack from three directions in a campaign to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
President Bush has openly declared his desire to remove Saddam by military force if necessary, but has offered few details of how he plans to accomplish that goal.
According to the newspaper, the document envisions hundreds of war planes based in as many as eight countries unleashing a huge air assault against thousands of targets, including airfields, roadways and fiber-optics communications sites.
Special operations forces or covert CIA operatives would strike at depots or laboratories storing or manufacturing Iraq's suspected weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to launch them, the report said.
Underscoring the preliminary nature of the planning, officials were cited as saying that none of the countries named in the document has been formally consulted about playing a role in any U.S. action against Iraq.
Prepared by Central Command Officials in Florida
Nothing in the document or in interviews with senior military officials suggests an attack on Iraq is imminent, the newspaper said.
The source familiar with the document described its contents to The New York Times on condition of anonymity, expressing frustration that the planning "failed to incorporate fully the advances in military tactics and technology since the Persian Gulf war in 1991," the report said.
The Times said the plan, titled "CentCom Courses of Action," was prepared by officials at the Central Command in Tampa, Fla., again citing the person familiar with the document.
At Brainstorming Stage
The newspaper said the outline indicated an advanced state of planning in the military even though Bush continued to say publicly that he has no plan on his desk for an invasion of Iraq.
"Right now, we're at the stage of conceptual thinking and brainstorming," a senior defense official told the Times. "We're pretty far along."
Officials told the newspaper that neither Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, nor the Joint Chiefs of Staff nor U.S. Central Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks had been briefed on this specific document.
"It is the responsibility of the Department of Defense to develop contingency plans and, from time to time, to update them," Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke told the newspaper on Thursday.
ABC News
July 5, 2002
N E W Y O R K, A draft U.S. military plan for an invasion of Iraq is said to envision a multi-pronged attack with tens of thousands of Marines and soldiers probably invading from Kuwait, The New York Times reported today.
Citing a person familiar with the document, the newspaper said the highly classified plan calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack from three directions in a campaign to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
President Bush has openly declared his desire to remove Saddam by military force if necessary, but has offered few details of how he plans to accomplish that goal.
According to the newspaper, the document envisions hundreds of war planes based in as many as eight countries unleashing a huge air assault against thousands of targets, including airfields, roadways and fiber-optics communications sites.
Special operations forces or covert CIA operatives would strike at depots or laboratories storing or manufacturing Iraq's suspected weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to launch them, the report said.
Underscoring the preliminary nature of the planning, officials were cited as saying that none of the countries named in the document has been formally consulted about playing a role in any U.S. action against Iraq.
Prepared by Central Command Officials in Florida
Nothing in the document or in interviews with senior military officials suggests an attack on Iraq is imminent, the newspaper said.
The source familiar with the document described its contents to The New York Times on condition of anonymity, expressing frustration that the planning "failed to incorporate fully the advances in military tactics and technology since the Persian Gulf war in 1991," the report said.
The Times said the plan, titled "CentCom Courses of Action," was prepared by officials at the Central Command in Tampa, Fla., again citing the person familiar with the document.
At Brainstorming Stage
The newspaper said the outline indicated an advanced state of planning in the military even though Bush continued to say publicly that he has no plan on his desk for an invasion of Iraq.
"Right now, we're at the stage of conceptual thinking and brainstorming," a senior defense official told the Times. "We're pretty far along."
Officials told the newspaper that neither Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, nor the Joint Chiefs of Staff nor U.S. Central Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks had been briefed on this specific document.
"It is the responsibility of the Department of Defense to develop contingency plans and, from time to time, to update them," Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke told the newspaper on Thursday.
All articles in this archive are used under "fair use" as they are important to the national discussion of whether or not the people of this country are being deceived by their government. These articles are used as evidence in that discussion.
