Salon Newsreal | Home for Ramadan?

A L S O+T O D A Y

Life of the party?
By Joshua Micah Marshall
With Livingston gone, Tom DeLay runs the party
(12/19/98)
Clinton tries to carry on...and on
By Harry Jaffe
(12/19/98)
A plague on all their houses
By Murray Waas
On Capitol Hill, partisan hard-liners have damaged the constitutional democracy they claim to hold so dear
(12/18/98)
The war at home?
By Jeff Stein
There's not much the U.S. can do to prevent an Iraqi terror attack, besides watch and listen
(12/18/98)
Going through the motions
By Harry Jaffe
Patrick Kennedy and Bob Barr's offstage sparring was the only surprise of Friday's impeachment debate
(12/17/98)
The Impeachment War: What on earth is going on?
Experts, pundits and kibitzers weigh in on Washington's weirdest week
(12/17/98)
And now, back to impeachment
By Bruce Shapiro
Republican skeptic Christopher Shays tries to explain why fence-sitting Republicans suddenly rushed to oppose the president
(12/18/98)
House of adulterers
By David Weir
Unless the GOP is able to convince voters the impeachment proceedings are based on more than disapproval of his private sexual affairs, revelations like Bob Livingston's will continue.
(12/18/98)
Rep. Bob Livingston's remarks
The text of the statement Thursday by the incoming speaker of the House
(12/18/98)

T A B L E+T A L K
Do you agree or disagree with President Clinton's decision to bomb Iraq? Join the debate in Table Talk's International Issues area

R E C E N T L Y
The few, the proud, the relieved
By Jeff Stein
President Clinton risked a revolt within the military if he pulled back from the brink with Iraq once again
(12/17/98)
Baghdad bombing: The right move, the wrong time
By Lori Leibovich
A foreign policy expert says Clinton should have struck Baghdad sooner -- and argues that U.S. sanctions should be lifted
(12/17/98)
Reaping the whirlwind
By Joshua Micah Marshall
Clinton's move against Iraq raises the stakes for both parties in the impeachment debate
(12/17/98)
The whole world is watching -- again
By Todd Gitlin
Left-wing literati turn out to block impeachment
(12/16/98)
Peace, the movie
By Daryl Lindsey
Clinton's three-day visit to the Middle East was full of symbols and photo ops, but precious little in the way of content
(12/16/98)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Browse the
Newsreal Archives
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

spacer Home for Ramadan?
Commentary
Don't hold your breath: Clinton's air war isn't likely to knock out Saddam Hussein.

BY JEFF STEIN | Ever since military pilots flew lazy-eights over the muddy trenches during World War I, dropping little bombs from their cockpits by hand, immense claims have been made for the knock-out power of airplanes.
Few of those claims have borne out, however. From World War II, when German war production surged during four years of bombing, to Vietnam, where the Ho Chi Minh Trail added a few lanes despite constant pounding by B-52s, air power has repeatedly demonstrated its limits. The exceptions -- such as the shut-your-mouth hit on Libya's Moammar Gadhaffi -- just prove the rule.
Infantry wins wars. And if history is any guide, the Nintendo-style air spectacular against Iraq won't deliver much of a lasting solution to the menace of Saddam Hussein beyond the booms, bangs and flashes filling TV screens in American living rooms right now. Unless it can get Saddam himself, which is unlikely.
To be sure, Saddam will be hurt. Iraq can't shrug off 200 cruise missile hits every day, more than were fired during the entire 43-day air assault of 1991, with heavy bombers to come. But it's hard to figure how a three-day, home-before-Ramadan air campaign will deliver something that six weeks worth of sustained U.S. bombing failed to produce in 1991. Like the Roadrunner outracing Wile E. Coyote, Saddam merely crawls out of his bunker each time and goes, "Beep-beep." That, as George Bush famously said, cannot be allowed to stand.
So exactly what are this round's bombing aims? From official statements, it's hard to say, since President Clinton virtually emptied his pockets of objectives and laid them out on the table for people to choose. Destroying Iraq's capability to wage chemical and biological war is one aim, he said, although Defense Secretary William Cohen was quick to admit Thursday that such facilities are small, mobile and hard to find. Clinton also said he had to act because his credibility would be at stake -- as if that still existed -- if he ignored Saddam's defiance of United Nations arms inspectors, as he opted to do three times previously.
N E X T+P A G E+| Will the American people run screaming from the truth?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Become a Salon member. Click here.

A L S O+T O D A Y Life of the party? By Joshua Micah Marshall With Livingston gone, Tom DeLay runs the party (12/19/98) Clinton tries to carry on...and on By Harry Jaffe (12/19/98) A plague on all their houses By Murray Waas On Capitol Hill, partisan hard-liners have damaged the constitutional democracy they claim to hold so dear (12/18/98) The war at home? By Jeff Stein There's not much the U.S. can do to prevent an Iraqi terror attack, besides watch and listen (12/18/98) Going through the motions By Harry Jaffe Patrick Kennedy and Bob Barr's offstage sparring was the only surprise of Friday's impeachment debate (12/17/98) The Impeachment War: What on earth is going on? Experts, pundits and kibitzers weigh in on Washington's weirdest week (12/17/98) And now, back to impeachment By Bruce Shapiro Republican skeptic Christopher Shays tries to explain why fence-sitting Republicans suddenly rushed to oppose the president (12/18/98) House of adulterers By David Weir Unless the GOP is able to convince voters the impeachment proceedings are based on more than disapproval of his private sexual affairs, revelations like Bob Livingston's will continue. (12/18/98) Rep. Bob Livingston's remarks The text of the statement Thursday by the incoming speaker of the House (12/18/98) T A B L E+T A L K Do you agree or disagree with President Clinton's decision to bomb Iraq? Join the debate in Table Talk's International Issues area R E C E N T L Y The few, the proud, the relieved By Jeff Stein President Clinton risked a revolt within the military if he pulled back from the brink with Iraq once again (12/17/98) Baghdad bombing: The right move, the wrong time By Lori Leibovich A foreign policy expert says Clinton should have struck Baghdad sooner -- and argues that U.S. sanctions should be lifted (12/17/98) Reaping the whirlwind By Joshua Micah Marshall Clinton's move against Iraq raises the stakes for both parties in the impeachment debate (12/17/98) The whole world is watching -- again By Todd Gitlin Left-wing literati turn out to block impeachment (12/16/98) Peace, the movie By Daryl Lindsey Clinton's three-day visit to the Middle East was full of symbols and photo ops, but precious little in the way of content (12/16/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
		Home for Ramadan? Don't hold your breath: Clinton's air war isn't likely to knock out Saddam Hussein. BY JEFF STEIN \| Ever since military pilots flew lazy-eights over the muddy trenches during World War I, dropping little bombs from their cockpits by hand, immense claims have been made for the knock-out power of airplanes. Few of those claims have borne out, however. From World War II, when German war production surged during four years of bombing, to Vietnam, where the Ho Chi Minh Trail added a few lanes despite constant pounding by B-52s, air power has repeatedly demonstrated its limits. The exceptions -- such as the shut-your-mouth hit on Libya's Moammar Gadhaffi -- just prove the rule. Infantry wins wars. And if history is any guide, the Nintendo-style air spectacular against Iraq won't deliver much of a lasting solution to the menace of Saddam Hussein beyond the booms, bangs and flashes filling TV screens in American living rooms right now. Unless it can get Saddam himself, which is unlikely. To be sure, Saddam will be hurt. Iraq can't shrug off 200 cruise missile hits every day, more than were fired during the entire 43-day air assault of 1991, with heavy bombers to come. But it's hard to figure how a three-day, home-before-Ramadan air campaign will deliver something that six weeks worth of sustained U.S. bombing failed to produce in 1991. Like the Roadrunner outracing Wile E. Coyote, Saddam merely crawls out of his bunker each time and goes, "Beep-beep." That, as George Bush famously said, cannot be allowed to stand. So exactly what are this round's bombing aims? From official statements, it's hard to say, since President Clinton virtually emptied his pockets of objectives and laid them out on the table for people to choose. Destroying Iraq's capability to wage chemical and biological war is one aim, he said, although Defense Secretary William Cohen was quick to admit Thursday that such facilities are small, mobile and hard to find. Clinton also said he had to act because his credibility would be at stake -- as if that still existed -- if he ignored Saddam's defiance of United Nations arms inspectors, as he opted to do three times previously. N E X T+P A G E+\| Will the American people run screaming from the truth? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Become a Salon member. Click here.