"But the world isn't like that"

[pynchonoid]

--- jbor <jbor at bigpond.com> wrote:
> apart from the fact that there's currently
> no actual war to stop,

I don't know what you call the current bombing of Iraq
carried out almost daily (50+ strikes this year that
have been publicly anounced), but it looks like war to
me-- fighter plane dropping bombs and firing rockets,
anti-aircraft fire, death and destruction on the
ground, & etc.  Bush has promised to escalate with an
attack Iraq to unseat Saddam Hussein  We want to stop
this escalation of the war that  before it starts.

No actual war?  Define it as you like, I guess, but
this sort of thing appears in the press, daily:

Airstrikes in Iraq appear to be war preparations 
But Pentagon says pilots in no-fly zone are responding
in self defense
By Robert Burns
Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- A key target of U.S. and British bombing
in Iraq in recent weeks has been an air base south of
Baghdad that would be central to Saddam Hussein's
defense against an American invasion. 

Since mid-September, Tallil Air Base -- a key link in
an Iraqi air defense network that remains formidable
despite damage from years of periodic U.S. bombing --
has been struck seven times, more than any other
target in that period, according to Central Command,
the headquarters for U.S. operations in the Persian
Gulf. 

The choice of bombing targets could reflect Pentagon
efforts to lay the groundwork for an invasion if
President Bush decides military force is needed to
oust Saddam Hussein. [...]  Besides Tallil, the other
major air defense sites in southern Iraq that have
been hit recently are Al Kut, Al Amarah and the
airport at Basra. On Tuesday, the Central Command said
allied aircraft bombed a command and control
communications facility near Al Kut, in response to
unspecified "hostile acts" by Iraq. [...] 
Rumsfeld did acknowledge last month that he ordered
U.S. forces to take a different approach. Instead of
firing mostly at Iraqi air-defense guns and radars,
pilots are now targeting more of the communications
centers, command buildings and fiber-optic links that
are easier to find and harder to replace. 

In at least a few cases, U.S. targets have appeared
related to preparations for war. 

On Sept. 5, for example, allied pilots bombed a
military airfield 240 miles west of Baghdad. The
target, as described by Central Command, was ordinary:
an air defense command and control facility. But the
location was unusual: a remote airfield known as H-3
that originally was built to support an oil pumping
station near the Jordanian border. In a break with its
usual practice, Central Command did not identify the
location. 

Stephen H. Baker, a retired Navy rear admiral who
served aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt during the
Gulf War, said the strike at H-3 was unprecedented in
the decade-long history of "no fly" zone patrols. 

"The objective of the strike could have been to
destroy air defenses to allow easy access for special
operations helicopters to fly into Iraq via Jordan or
Saudi Arabia as part of a critical primary mission to
hunt down Scud" missiles, Baker said recently.
"Knocking out Iraqi radars at H-3 also would allow
allied aircraft mounting major raids on Iraq a clear
route into the country." 

[...] 

On the Net: 

Operation Southern Watch at http://www.centcom.mil 

Operation Northern Watch at http://www.eucom.mil 


source:
http://www.sanmateocountytimes.com/Stories/0,1413,87%7E11268%7E928255,00.html





> is that they seem to be totally OK with the prospect
> of Saddam launching
> pre-emptive strikes with his (alleged) weapons of
> mass destruction, just so
> long as no-one else launches a pre-emptive strike to
> stop him from doing so.

This is flamebait; in that same vein, one could
respond:  the warmongers seem to be totally OK with
the prospect of  launching a bloody surprise attack
and invasion that kills hundreds of thousands of
innocents (as the first Gulf War and subsequent
sanctions have done), in order to keep control of oil
resources for the bloated Western lifestyle and
assuage the irrational fears of Americans, Europeans,
and Australians. 

The truth lies somewhere in between these poles, of
course.  The operation of unconscious drives and
motives makes it difficult to ascertain with any
certainty why Bush (or Saddam) does what he does. 
But, time and again in Pynchon-L, we've seen jbor use
this sort of rhetoric to attack the motives of
anti-war workers and at the same time promote the Bush
agenda. I find it offensive in this forum, and I know
that quite a few other P-lsters do, too. 




=====
<http://www.pynchonoid.blogspot.com/>

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com