Iraq invasion off the table

I wrote earlier this week that chances of a US invasion of Iraq were limited at best. The logisitics of such an invasion were nearly impossible given the non-existent international support for such an operation. And every time US planners floated an idea, such as using Jordan as a launching pad, the country in question would fire back a fierce denial.

So it is no surprise that US war planners are now "raising the bar" for an Iraq invasion:

A full-scale U.S. invasion of Iraq will require significant provocation by Saddam Hussein's regime -- such as invading a neighbor, fielding a nuclear weapon or attacking its minority population, top Bush administration officials have concluded.

Senior officials at the Pentagon ( news - web sites), State Department and other agencies say President Bush ( news - web sites)'s national security team has agreed that the most dramatic option for toppling Saddam -- a large-scale invasion -- would be politically difficult at home and abroad without justification beyond Iraq's current friction with Washington over the suspected development of weapons of mass destruction.

Still, all is not well. The Bushies, obsessed with taking out Saddam, have ordered the CIA to continue investigating possible links between Iraq and 9-11. To date, no such links have been found, and it begs the question whether the administration will manufacture a link to bolster their war efforts. In addition, if a link to 9-11 is a legitimate pretext for an invasion, we should be marching on Riyadh at this very moment, with Yemen in the on-deck circle.

The GOP's right-wing, led by the shrill folks at National Review, will not take kindly to this news. Fleischer will rush out a statement claiming that "all options are still on the table." But reality has finally sunk in on the administration. The state department and the Pentagon have made their case, and for now, the good guys have come out ahead.

Posted July 11, 2002 07:54 AM | Comments (5)