Most public debate about U.S. war plans for Iraq has been led by U.S. allegations about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, justifying "regime change" by military action. The U.K. and other governments appear caught up in the group think of the Bush Administration's "War on Terrorism". (Please click image to enlarge.)
Group think involves self-justifying logic that generates an illusion of morality, demands unquestioning conformity, accepts dangerously high risk strategies and demonises enemies and dissenters (1). It explained strategic errors that led to the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
In time of war, vital combat and aftermath data that may alter public perception, government decisions or arms procurement is classified, concealed or distorted on the pretext of state security. It is vital to separate facts from propaganda about terrorist threats and Iraqi or allied weapons.
In time of war, vital combat and aftermath data that may alter public perception, government decisions or arms procurement is classified, concealed or distorted on the pretext of state security. It is vital to separate facts from propaganda about terrorist threats and Iraqi or allied weapons.
Since September 11th U.S. and U.K. Government agendas have excluded any debate about the weapon systems used by U.S. and allied forces (2). Their potentially devastating effects on the Iraqi population and allied ground forces may far exceed hazards from weapons that Iraq may have developed.
Most of the guided weapons that will be used in new air attacks on Iraq - smart bombs and cruise missiles - will be the same as those used in Afghanistan (3). No independent assessment has been made of post-war health & environmental conditions there.
Most of the guided weapons that will be used in new air attacks on Iraq - smart bombs and cruise missiles - will be the same as those used in Afghanistan (3). No independent assessment has been made of post-war health & environmental conditions there.