|
In
the Press This Week
War on Iraq: The Reassessment
(March 22
2003 - March 29 2003)
|
By V&A Editorial Staff
|
29/03/2003
|
From
The New York Times
(March
29 2003)
“But
what we're seeing, especially in the images from Nasiriya and Basra,
is an age-old reminder about the reality of war. Under the armor
there is still only the flesh and blood and sinew of young soldiers.
It makes no difference whether that armor is the shield of an
ancient Greek soldier or the electronics jamming of a modern attack
aircraft.”
Under
the Armor
From
The Independent
(March
29 2003)
“The
implications of a long war are serious. The case for military action
was sold with the implication that it would be short and relatively
bloodless. Even on that basis, George Bush and his award-winning
salesman Tony Blair could not persuade world opinion that it was
necessary. Now that they appear to accept that the fighting will
last months rather than weeks, with all the likely consequences in
blood and suffering, support for the war, although it may have
increased briefly once British troops were engaged, could recede…
“This
is not simply a matter of the immediate human cost in death, injury,
grief and fear. That will be multiplied by an unknown factor as it
is translated into anti-American sentiment throughout other Arab and
Muslim countries. In Iraq, meanwhile, it is becoming clearer that
the feelings of the people towards their self-appointed liberators
are more ambivalent than was allowed for in the world -view of the
American right. That means the post-war situation in Iraq will be
less tractable, and more expensive, than expected…
“[I]t
is also right that democratic leaders who make the wrong choices and
mislead people to justify them should be held to account.”
There
will be a severe political price to pay if the human and financial
costs of this conflict mount up
From
The Guardian
(March
29 2003)
“Of
course, events on the ground could rapidly unblock with Saddam's
regime belatedly following the Pentagon script and duly falling to
its knees. But the way things stand now, this war is going badly for
the PM. These first 10 days have disproved two of his core, pre-war
arguments: that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and that his
people would instantly see foreign invasion as liberation…
“But
this war has been neither hard enough nor easy enough to prove Blair
right: instead it is turning out to be a slog that shows he and the
military planners read Iraq wrong. In the choice words of America's
top infantry commander, William Wallace: ‘The enemy we're fighting
is different from the one we'd war-gamed against…’”
Even
if he wins the war, Blair has been humiliated
From
The Washington Post
(March
29 2003)
“The
moment the first shots were fired last week in the war against Iraq,
the Bush administration pivoted sharply to dampen public
expectations of the military operation.
“In
the months preceding the war, President Bush was largely silent on
the subject of the conflict's cost, duration and dangers, while key
administration officials and advisers presented upbeat forecasts.
Vice President Cheney, for example, predicted Iraqi President Saddam
Hussein's troops would ‘step aside’ and that the conflict would
be ‘weeks rather than months,’ a phrase repeated by other top
officials. Others in advisory roles in the administration predicted
Iraqi soldiers would ‘throw in the towel’ and Hussein would
collapse like ‘a house of cards’ -- phrases senior
administration officials often echoed in private…
“Other
forecasts seem increasingly improbable. Richard Perle, until this
week chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board, said last
summer that Hussein is ‘much weaker than we think he is.’
Calling the regime a ‘house of cards,’ Perle said ‘support for
Saddam, including within his military organization, will collapse at
the first whiff of gunpowder…’
Upbeat
Tone Ended With War
|
