From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Iraqis attempt to kill UN inspectors
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:28:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.102234.3232@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> dam@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (David Morning) writes:
>
>This must be the first article I've seen in WEEKS in this group. I thought it
>had gone dead.
>
>drm@esl.com (Don McGregor) writes:
>
>[Reported bomb planting on UN official in Iraq]
>
>>Personally, I think Saddam's gonna get whacked for this one.
>>Bush has obviously been unenthusiastic about military action
>>while the election's on; there are too many variables and too
>>much of a downside risk.

	**Bear the above in mind if you're outside the U.S.**
>
>>Fearless prediction: The US and allies bomb Baghdad and selected
>>RG targets, and announce that Saddam must go.  Revolts in the

	Forty days and forty nights of hard rain didn't change his mind,
	another couple of dozen sorties won't do it either.

>>North and South are given air cover.  With a clear commitment from
>>the US that Saddam will be toppled, one way or another, coup planning
>>increases.  Saddam buys it from a bomb (low but non-trivial possibility)
>>or a 9 mm slug.  It's unclear that Iraq remains as a united state after
>>all this, which is a loss.  Clinton and the congress would instantly climb on
>>board for this one, for a null op to slight Bush bounce in the polls.

>I don't buy it Don. There appears to be a great reluctance to go back to
>bombing Bagdahd for what-ever reasons.
>It's more likely that the signal for a further revolt would be the assassination
>of Hussein, but, given the severe pounding the Kurds in the North and the
>Shi-ites in the south took from the RG after the initial coup, it's doubtful
>if the could raise an effective fighting force, air cover or not.

	Agreed, the only people capable of killing SH are the allied
	air forces and SH would have to be killed before any revolts
	would be able to succeed.  I think the only way they would
	succeed would be a swift strike (memories of the 502nd) while
	the Ba'athists were confused by the death of SH and some of
	close associates.

>In the event of a successful revolt, it's almost certain that Iraq would
>fragment, with a Kurdistan being formed in the north, bagging a chunk of
>Iraqs' oil reservers. It's also probable that a Shi-ite state in the South
>would be formed, aligning itself with Iran. Iraq would then be left as an
>ineffective state in the middle with Iran now the major power in the Gulf
>area of the Middle East and that's something the vast majority of the Arab
>states DON'T want to see.

	I see this as a real possibility, I don't however, give
	much of a chance to peaceful change at this point.
>
>>Why: I don't see a merely punative expedition as being saleable to the
>>US public.  If we're going to start shooting again, the gov't will want
>>to take him off the board once and for all, and stop all this nonsense
>>about "cheat and retreat" on the ceasefire agreement.  A commitement
>>to removing him will start people thinking about who takes his place
>>afterwards.  If he's a dead man at the hands of the US/allies
>>in a short period of time anyway, the jockeying for postion will be
>>given a big boost.  The societal stresses of another war will relax
>>the Iraqi government's grip on the citizens, leading to revolt.

	Unfortunately, there is no Iraqi government in exile to take
	over.  The only thing that could be done would be a UN or
	Arab League mandate to administer the country until the people
	were "re-educated" and a stable government that will respect
	the rights of the people is VOTED IN.

>Depends on what sort of position of power Hussein's son holds at the moment
>and whether he can get th RG on his sides. It seems probable that the RG
>would side with him on the basis that his dad has kept there 'nest warm' and
>he is liable to do the same if they help him take over the reins of power.
>The combination of bribery, corruption and murder is what got Hussein into
>power in the first place..like father, like son I'd reckon.
>
	Sonny boy is in charge of one of the Secret Police Organizations
	right now.  This analysis could be right.  In which case you're
	left with the chilly thought of a concerted attempt to bump off
	father & son, combined with support for revolts in the North and
	South, and direct military intervention (by the UN?) to pin the
	Republican Guard down and if necessary finish them off as the
	last thing left to try.

	Comments please, this was a bit rushed.

	Alec.
Xref: sparky alt.desert-storm:1694 alt.conspiracy:10000 alt.folklore.urban:21429