Shane Mage:
> The point, however, is that, for the most obvious geographical reasons, a 
> *successful* attack would not be militarily conceivable without the use of 
> Iraqi territory and territorial waters.  It would also be politically 
> impossible without the acquiescence of the Shiite Iraqi government.  Both are 
> precluded by the SOFA.<

But what are the standards of "success"? if this means "conquest,"
then Iraq is definitely needed as a base. But if it simply means
strategic bombing of a limited number of sites, is Iraq really needed?
Israel once bombed Iraq without having any near-by bases.
-- 
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to