portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

imperialism & war

Iraq Might Strike First, Defense Officials Warn

Iraq Might Strike First, Defense Officials Warn

WASHINGTON Saddam Hussein may be considering pre-emptive strikes on American and British troops, Israeli targets and his own people if he feels war is inevitable, Pentagon officials have told Fox News.
We have to assume that if he feels he has been backed into a corner, he may believe his only real shot comes from trying something first," one official said Thursday night.

Defense surveillance has revealed movements of Iraqi troops and heavy artillery toward the southern border, from which they could take up positions to shell U.S. troops dug in inside Kuwait, Fox News learned Thursday.

U.S. officials also said they have seen Iraqi surface-to-surface Scud missiles moved into parts of western Iraq that would put them within striking distance of Israel.

The Iraqis may have wired key oil fields in the north and the south of the country with explosives for possible detonation should the coalition launch an attack.

The developments could signal plans for pre-emptive missile attacks on Israel, as well as attacks on U.S. forces and Iraqi civilians.

U.S. officials said any and all such eventualities were built into the main allied battle plan, implying that there were prescribed counter-measures in place should Iraq attack first. Officials would not comment on the details of any pre-emptive scenarios.

The United States has been moving about 10 Navy ships armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles from the eastern Mediterranean to the Red Sea, senior U.S. officials said Thursday. The move indicates weakening U.S. confidence that Turkey will grant overflight rights for U.S. planes and missiles.

From the Red Sea the cruisers, destroyers and submarines would be able to launch their Tomahawks expected to be fired in the opening hours of a war over Saudi Arabia to targets in Iraq.

The ships are part of the USS Harry S. Truman and USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier battle groups, which have been operating in the eastern Mediterranean for weeks in anticipation of war against Iraq.

No decision has been made to move the carriers themselves from the Mediterranean, but that could be a next step, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Each carrier has about 80 aircraft aboard.

Tomahawks are satellite-guided missiles designed to be used in the opening stages of war to strike high-value, fixed targets such as government buildings in areas where the risk of civilian casualties is relatively high.

The Tomahawks evade radar by skimming land or sea surfaces. Following the Gulf War, they became one of the U.S. weapons of choice to respond to Iraqi breaches of U.N. sanctions.

The issue of Turkish overflight rights for U.S. missiles and planes has been overshadowed by the Bush administration's struggle to win Ankara's approval to base 60,000 or more U.S. troops there to open a northern front against Iraq.

The Turkish parliament failed to pass the U.S. request for basing rights earlier this month. Pentagon officials said Thursday it appeared increasingly unlikely that the Army would position its 4th Infantry Division there as originally planned.

About three dozen cargo ships with the 4th Infantry Division's weaponry, equipment and supplies have been waiting off the Turkish coast for weeks, and the troops are still at their base in Fort Hood, Texas.

During the 1991 Gulf War the Navy positioned carriers and Tomahawk-launching ships in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. It now has three carriers in the Gulf the USS Kitty Hawk, the USS Constellation and the USS Abraham Lincoln

homepage: homepage: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81047,00.html

Stop that! 14.Mar.2003 11:45

An Activist

What's up with all these right-wing nuts smearing their propaganda (straight from fox news) all over this website. If I want to hear bullshit like this, I might as well watch the news on television. Then I'm assured that I'm being lied to. I read the news here to get a different perspective on the news, and hear news that isn't covered by the main stream media. So if you think you might be a right wing nut, then please don't post stuff that is already in the news. Thank You.

Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, ... 14.Mar.2003 11:57

More BU**SH**

After months of inspections and disarming to avoid war, Iraq is going to attack U.S. forces first. How much bullshit does Bush expect us to swallow? The U.S. knew about Pearl Harbor, yet let it happen to gain public support for a war. Decades after the Vietnam War, we learn the North Vietnamese did NOT fire first on U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin: it was simply the excuse to sell the war. Any "pre-emptive" attack on U.S. troops will obviously be a staged one--and Iraqi civilians will pay the price.

diplomacy 14.Mar.2003 12:16

how it is

diplomacy
diplomacy

Why Wouldn't They? 14.Mar.2003 15:13

Ed Harley

Why *wouldn't* Iraq strike first? Do you think that if some foreign government was massing hundreds of thousands of troops at the border of the US in order to launch an unprovoked, illegal attack the US would not do anything necessary to defend itself?

Regardless of your opinion on the war, you have to be a goddamn moron to expect them to just sit there and do nothing, while a massive invading force prepares to attack them.

expect them to just sit there and do nothing 14.Mar.2003 15:50

sd

Well, that is just what they did in 1991.

that was way too stupid, and I don't see much difference this time around either, they are just surrendering faster now, than in 1991..

Not Quite 14.Mar.2003 16:49

Ed Harley

In 1991, the stated objective was to drive Iraq out of Kuwait, not to overthrow Saddam - so, things are likely to be different. Anyway, I'd surrender, too, if a lunatic like Rumpsfelt was threatening me... the guy Kissenger said was the most ruthless person he'd ever met. That's kinda like Hitler complementing you on your atrocities.