Your second scenario, Gordy, is much more likely. They will not be fighting 7 million iraqis, not even arguably, all of the Republican Guard, but roughly the 70,000 odd that make up the Special Republican Guard, plus factions within the Republican Guard who choose to fight against the ‘allies’.
Matt, you can easily be pedantic about comparisons with Vietnam. Of course the circumstances in which the two conflicts arise would be different, and the nature of the conflict would be quite different.
I think Ken Clarke was maybe a little bit naive regarding how this war, if it happens, would pan out. However, if it were to be a protracted and messy affair (which we really cannot know, regardless of any confidence in American military might), Clarke would be right. This can end up like a Vietnam, though there is much more at stake with this conflict. The old and o so clear divisions of the cold war are now gone. All is to play for, which is why France Germany Russia Britain and of course the us are all going out of their way to assert themselves now, so as to hold a high place in an international order that is now up for grabs.
The Iraqi plan in war would be to fight with guerilla warfare, as a weapon-punch strategy would defeat the object of trying to trying to avert the ‘aggressors’. The response would simply be obliterative.
Incidentally, I hope you’re both getting as much out of these threads as I am. If when engaging with the opposing argument, you find yourself truly cornered, do not be afraid to change your view. We’re all here because we have a passion for the truth. I am totally unconvinced of the arguments for forceful military intervention in Iraq, as the world-wide repercussions would be too much to bare. I do not oppose war in principle, but I do believe that if more effort was made in international relations at finding a consensus than has even been consistently the case since world war 2, there should really be no need for forceful military intervention. It is nearly always those who do not follow the rules of international relations that end up on the recieving end of a war, and usually defeat. Politics is important. And ignoring the views of political leaders around the world, is an ignorance at peril. Solidarity, as undesirable as it may seem at times, is absolutely crucial. If one side is not convincing their opponent of their arguments, they must find an unfashionable comprimise and consensus.
Next Friday will see a critical junction in the history of international relations. Do not blink.