Pess Release on the US Bombings of Iraq in 2001

Here are a couple of links re the two major bombings of Iraq in 2001. 1st one was Feb & 2nd one August (have tried to locate press report that specifically mentioned systems installed by Chinese contractors but haven't found it yet)

*********************************
1)

[link|http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/02/20010216-2.html|Ari Fleischer Speaks on US bombing of radar facilities - Feb 16 2001]

Excerpts ...The President authorized the strike because of the risk posed to our aircraft. All coalition aircraft have returned safely.

Q Was this planned, Ari, or was this a spontaneous --

MR. FLEISCHER: The President authorized it yesterday.

Q When did he authorize it?

MR. FLEISCHER: Yesterday.

Q Did something happen to provoke this, Ari, did some incident happen to provoke this?

MR. FLEISCHER: It was the existence of radar facilities that posed a threat to our aircraft, that identified our aircraft. There is a simultaneous briefing going on at the Pentagon as we speak. The Pentagon is briefing at 2:30 p.m. and will provide additional detailed information about the strikes and about the targets.

Q For the President to have specifically approved it indicates it's more than just a routine thing, though, because rules of engagement --

MR. FLEISCHER: No, it is routine. In this case, the aircraft would be on patrol in the southern no-fly zone, and that's why it required the President's authorization. That has happened before; that is, unfortunately, routine.

***********************
2)

[link|http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/aug2001/iraq-a17.shtml|October Attacks on longrange Radar facilities]

A short extract that hits the point ...

"The intensified bombing of Iraq is thus a form of US saber-rattling, directed not only against Saddam Hussein but also at the European powers that are challenging American hegemony in the oil-rich region. Russia may be able to block US plans for more effective sanctions, China may supply high-tech gear to Baghdad, France and Germany may have well-advanced plans for economic penetration of Iraq, but the United States is seeking to serve notice that it remains the decisive military power in the Gulf."

*********************************************************************
My speculation (no hard evidence) is that US may have been destroying a similar system to the PCLS one said to have been used in Serbia.

Cheers Doug

1) In the uneneding search to counter Techno-1, Techno-2 shall be deleoped, with the profits going to the usual suspects - the advanced ones already developing Techno-3 to counter Techno-2.

2) To make the pigeons safe for further extraction of funds as might have gone for schools, infrastructure repair (in US - overdue since Roosevelt died / end WW-II) etc. - Techno-n always approaches the pilot-less [thing] and we can see already, is asymptotic to merely a Nintendo controller (with Clearance). Remote control out of Tee Vee B-ploys.

3) As 1) and 2) are endless progressions and have the effect of further concentrating more wealth in fewer Controllers, the clincher is: these processes do Not require the species to grow-up. Thus

4) There can be no end to the scheme. (Except extinction, natch)

No point in betting, for all obvious reasons - perhaps the only useful lesson from War Games: the only way to win this game is not to play.

(A moderately humorous plot I think.. at least to any non-speciesist)

:-\ufffd

Ashton
(just visiting here - think 'a Disneyworld vacation')

Welcome to IWETHEY!