It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Major Assaults on Hold Until After U.S. Vote

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:01 PM

WASHINGTON The Bush administration plans to delay major assaults on rebel-held cities in Iraq until after U.S. elections in November, say administration officials, mindful that large-scale military offensives could affect the U.S. presidential race.

Although American commanders in Iraq have been buoyed by recent successes in insurgent-held towns such as Samarra and Tall Afar, administration and Pentagon officials say they will not try to retake cities such as Fallouja and Ramadi where the insurgents' grip is strongest and U.S. military casualties could be the highest until after Americans vote in what is likely to be an extremely close election.

"When this election's over, you'll see us move very vigorously," said one senior administration official involved in strategic planning, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"Once you're past the election, it changes the political ramifications" of a large-scale offensive, the official said. "We're not on hold right now. We're just not as aggressive."

Any delay in pacifying Iraq's most troublesome cities, however, could alter the dynamics of a different election the one in January, when Iraqis are to elect members of a national assembly.


I have heard this before, but it's the first time I've seen it in the mainstream media. I guess the "terrorists" are winning. They are affecting US foreign policy, and our elections.

posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:10 PM
I mean no offense, but did you really think that they wouldn't affect the election? I think it is pretty obvious that they will! With a pretty good percentage of our militarial forces fighting terrorism, it is going to be a large topic! Even if the terrorists don't care wheter they affect it or not.

posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:12 PM
perhaps this is a strategy to keep the public from getting upset as to casualties that may result from these attacks, usually people tend to react negatively to news of the death.

I believe we are not going to get many news in the coming weeks about Iraq, unless it gets his way here in ATSNN via outside sources in the internet..

posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:25 PM
What's this "news outside of ATSNN"?????? Watch Fox? If I want republican bs. CNN? MSNBC? They controlled by Bush&Co, why they don't mention Badnarik. ATSNN is about the only place to get good news, and I mean ATSNN, not regular ATS, to many opinions.

posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:40 PM
It is becoming increasingly evident that major assaults on 'insurgent controlled' areas of Iraq are both imminent and necessary.

Fortunately for Bush, he'll be a 4-year lame duck and can weather the domestic pressure that comes from a nation who wants the strongest military in the world, but cannot stomach the inevitable casualties that come from flexing that muscle.

Unfortunately for 'President' Kerry, an adjusted agenda in Iraq will likely not avoid major conflict in order to stabilize Iraq's deteriorating civil conditions and he'll be the one who has to defend the inevitable casualties which will result from an effort to finish a dirty job. That'll probably cost him 2008.

Damned if you do...damned if you won't.

Raise the salary to something in the $10 million per annum range and maybe I'll consider running for the worst job in the world!

posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:51 PM
The problem is that now the most cities again the coalition forces are in the Sunni area of Iraq, actually these cities hold Iraqi nationals, now that the Shiite has given up their arms because Al-Sadr has political aspirations the sunnis are not happy about that, and taking in consideration that the Kurds in the north careless what coalition is doing in Iraq as long as they do not bother them in their lands.

Is going to turn into a massacre of civilians in the Sunni populated part of the country, and that is not good for the administration as now, so close to elections.

posted on Oct, 12 2004 @ 09:58 PM
If true , we should not let what the left is spewing , we still need to do what is needed and WHEN it is needed. BUt in that respect, the left has somewhat won a battle but not the war. Throw the pictures of nothing but BAD news and it can change public opinion, but there are folks who are not likely to believe the vomit they spew, Bad news as well as good news should be given. I started a thread with good news but alas, no one really cares about that.

Hopefully if an attack is needed, go for it!

top topics


log in