by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright June 15, 2003
All Rights Reserved.

humbing his nose at U.S. forces, Saddam Hussein—and his deranged sons—has managed to elude detection, slipping through the cracks somewhere between Baghdad and Tikrit, or so say miscellaneous reports. Each day costs at least one American life, as the death toll continues to rise with Saddam's loyalists mounting an annoying, but deadly, guerrilla campaign. "There is somebody out there trying to kill soldiers," said Lt. Col. Joel Armstrong, commander of the 2nd Squadron of the Army's 2nd Cavalry Regiment, noting mounting casualties among U.S. troops. Since the war began on March 17, the U.S.-British forces sustained 209 casualties and 627 injuries, though roughly 60 were attributable to "friendly fire" or accidents. "These are deliberate attacks," said Armstrong, acknowledging it's difficult to stop bush warfare. With no end in sight, allied forces are now sitting ducks.

      Controversy about exaggerated claims of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, continue to hound the White House. "I'm absolutely certain we'll find Saddam's weapons," President Bush told reporters shortly after announcing an end to combat operations in early May. Hedging his bets, "I'm confident," said President Bush, "that Iraq had an illicit weapons program," no longer insisting that Saddam actually possessed weapons of mass destruction. With U.S. inspectors shooting blanks, there's growing uncertainty about WMD. "One thing I can say for sure is there's no smoking gun," said Lt. Col. Michael Kingsforfd, a member of the Army's special task force searching for weapons of mass destruction. Weapons of mass destruction—and the threat posed on U.S. national security—were the rationale given to topple Saddam Hussein. Without WMD, the justification for war looks tenuous—at least to some.

      Booting out Saddam Hussein and securing world's second largest oil fields at Basra and Kirkuk, the U.S. pulled off the biggest land grab since the Louisiana Purchase. Yet, since the end of hostilities, motives for the war keep shifting. Asking for early retirement, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitiz admitted in Vanity Fair the Defense Department seized on WMD because it offered the most credible excuse for war. But since hostilities ended, the White House blamed the war on (a) the war on terrorism, (b) eliminating a threat to U.S. national security, (c) removing a dangerous global menace and, more recently, (d) liberating and democratizing an oppressed people. With Iraq in chaos and over 200,000 U.S. troops trying to maintain order, there's no current plan to leave anytime soon. U.S. troops have become target practice for roving bands of vigilantes upset about U.S. occupation.

      Central command insists that residual Baath Party loyalists are responsible for ongoing attacks on U.S. troops. Looting one billion from the Iraqi Central Bank, U.S. officials believe Saddam currently pays mercenaries to attack U.S. troops. "Remnants of the regime," said Lt. Col. Joel Armstrong, are responsible for the targeted assassinations of U.S. forces. But before the war started, CIA predicted that U.S. troops would be met with flag-waving Shiites in the south. When the allies took Um Qasar and El Nassariah, they were met with Kalashnikovs and rocket- propelled grenades. While some Iraqis cheered, most opened fire on U.S. troops. "I don't know that anybody's been ruled out per se, but we certainly know that it has been organized locally because of the weaponry, because of the tactics that are involved," said U.S. military spokesperson, uncertain about the origin of armed resistance.

      U.S. military "viceroy" Paul Brenner believes that pockets of resistance still loyal to Saddam Hussein are mounting vigorous counter-insurgency. To believe otherwise suggests that the U.S. isn't wanted in Iraq. Over 200,000 U.S. troops are in harms way because the White House insists that Iraq poses a clear-and-present danger to U.S. national security. "And again, I don't know that we've ruled any out, but we certainly believe some of it is from the former Baath regime and perhaps even paramilitary," said Col. Rich Thomas, unwilling to concede that resistance is deeper and more widespread than the military first acknowledged. Since the outset of hostilities, U.S. troops continue to be rich targets for terrorists inside Iraq. Recent attacks by Sunni Muslims indicate that the military faces growing guerrilla warfare with no end in sight. Blaming assassinations on only "remnants" of Saddam's regime ignores mounting evidence.

      Without any exist strategy, the White House has committed 25% of the U.S. voluntary military to Iraq. Already spread thin in the Far East-and Southeast Asia, the White House must reconsider its mission and establish a clear exist strategy to preserve U.S. national security. Committing U.S. forces to endless nation building gives no clear exit strategy. U.S. forces are now getting picked off one-by-one, requiring a complete reevaluation of the current mission. Chasing Saddam hither-and-yond or looking futilely for weapons of mass destruction, leaves the military vulnerable in Iraq and elsewhere. Sticking to the party line, "It will take time to root out the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime, and we intend to do it," said Secretary of State Donald H. Rumsfeld,
denying the growing reality that the U.S. isn't wanted in Iraq. With U.S. forces sitting ducks, it's time the White House takes another look.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.