(Morale is always high as forces prepare for war. Remember basic? In-friggin'-vincible! Bulletproof! The meanest, baddest guys in the world!!)

"Have heard of prep starting for the massing of up to 175 k for a definitive strike on Saddam."

Do you think in the current climate, with Sharon rampaging through Palestinian lands with GWBs tacit consent, the Saudi's will tolerate that many more Americans on their soil?

Do you think that Bahrain and others would tolerate that many Americans if the Saudis won't?

Can the US get rid of Saddam and install a puppet regime with a force that size? (I seem to remember being told the Iraqi army was the third largest in the world at the time of the Gulf War, though that was clearly propaganda and whatever size it was it's much smaller now. Bigger than a 175K force with extended supply lines, though.)

Would an almost unilateral strike on Iraq be perceived as yet another in a series of actions directed more against Islam than self-defense against terrorism?
If so, how would that make the US task more difficult?

Do you think the US can successfully manage a war in that part of the world without help? (It seems to me that Saddam is winning the PR war everywhere that doesn't have GHWB's kid as President and Britain.)

Interesting times. There's a part of me that would sort of like to see the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld folks try it.

Arf