Picking a Fight.

[Occhidiangela]

Wow, plans to take a US plane, paint it in UN colours, and get Saddam to shoot it down?

And plans for a quick resolution. Move in, shake it up, move it out. Blammo, it's done. Haha!

I don't know if this is polical commentary or just bad comedy.
[right][snapback]105553[/snapback][/right]

Bad comedy I think.

The myth of a short war is not a new failing at the political level: see the Schliefen Plan, and Plan XVII, of 1914. See also the American "We will be done in a year" in 1966, "Home by Christmas" in Korea, and Clinton's "We will be done in Bosnia in year" PROMISE to Congress in 1995. And so on. See the Wehrmacht's Operation Barbarosa.

I read the article this morning.

I have trouble with the notion that anyone with a brain considered using a U2 as a decoy. First of all, Saddam's IAD in 2003 didn't have much that could hit a U2, unless it was flown on a profile well outside of a normal high altitude surveillance mission. An escorted U2, as in escorted with fighter and EW aircraft, would not have to worry about SAM's at all.

A U2 with UN colors? That beggars belief. It would be such an obvious plant.

Seriously.

Relying on the Francis Gary Powers symbol of a U2 would be absurd. If Pres Bush mused about such things, which is believable given how little he understands the details of most issues in front of him, I suspect a few operators would be able to enlighten him. Harder would be enlightening some of the deluded morons who advise him of the sheer lunacy of such a caper. Yes, a few card carrying geniuses -- Feith, Perle and Wolfy -- asserted that General Franks didn't need more than a few brigades to win the fight in Iraq, 2003. But I digress.

A U2 is a very singular aircraft, with a singular profile and purpose. The UN doesn't not get highly classified spy planes seconded to it. Info from a U2 mission might be scrubbed and passed along, as were the 1962 Cuban missile photos, but that is a national asset jealously protected and in high demand. We used to call it a LDHD asset: Low Density High Demand.

A UN Cargo plane over Iraq, shot down, would be more plausible, but the UN isn't Stupid Enough -- I am defending the UN here -- to violate its "hands off" reputation to pull such a stunt, flying a Hercules over Iraq without Saddam's permission. An ICAO violation in any case. How soon we forget the Peacekeepers from Denmark who were blythely allowed to be captured by Bosnian Serbs. :P That's the UN in action.

EDIT: Assur notes that it was Dutch, not Danish, who were involved. My error.

That PM Blair and President Bush were certain they had to go into Iraq is one thing. That such a transparent ploy would have been envisioned as anything other than the musings of a Hollywood scriptwriter, or a complete rube, is quite another. (Yes, I am playing the straight man here. ;) )

I have been on the receiving end, as a staff officer, of numerous "General Officer Good Ideas" to pursue, and even a few "Hey, the folks back there (DC) want to . . ." insanities. I have helped disabuse a few card carrying smart guys, and their Hollywood based understanding of "the art of the possible," more than once.

I can't find the UN decoy scenario as other than a joke.

The larger policy issues are of serious concern. They should be of concern to every Senator and every Congressman who voted "Yes" when Pres Bush wanted to go into Iraq. What troubles me is that I believe they are not, due to their having been coopted. These folks are hoping "it will just go away."

It won't.

Occhi