   Here are excerpts from editorials in U.S. newspapers about the beginning of
the ground offensive in the Persian Gulf War. 

    

   ---

    

   The New York Times: 

    

   Americans can hope that the war will be both swift and limited. But it will
not be damage-free. It will exact a price on the battlefield and, however
successful the outcome, it could well exact a price diplomatically, especially
in America's relations with the Soviet Union. On this point Mr. Bush's advisers
have displayed not euphoria but an admirable practicality. 

    

   ---

    

   The Dallas Morning News: 

    

   ``Although half-promises of peace were at times achingly close, President
Bush was right to order the commencement of this final phase of the war. Iraqi
dictator Saddam Hussein has proven himself a merciless, calculating despot
whose word is nothing more than another weapon. He cannot be trusted to
implement a peace agreement. There was little reason to see the last-minute
maneuvering of his government as anything but an attempt to buy time, and that
would have escalated the danger to allied troops if zero hour finally arrived
during treacherous weather...Yet even if Saddam Hussein leaves the mass of his
troops to collapse in Kuwait, the allies should not pursue him to his bunker in
Baghdad. Although tempting, such a move would turn a just war into a war of
conquest. That would risk a loss of global support and would risk fracturing
the coalition which George Bush has so masterfully assembled and maintained. 

   Whether President Hussein is chased to Baghdad or not - he is finished.'' 

    

   ---

    

   Dallas Times Herald: 

    

   ``It's too soon to claim victory, of course. There is much still to be done.
But the first 18 hours of ground battle leave every reason for optimism. It's
especially gratifying to see how well the coalition has worked together. The
British and French have delivered for the alliance, and so have the Saudis and
Egyptians. President Bush can take justifiable pride in the cohesion of these
forces. 

   There is much anguish in any war. No doubt that will be true of the Persian
Gulf as well. But so far allied forces have acquitted themselves with great
distinction.'' 

    

   ---

    

   The Courier-Tribune, Asheboro, N.C.: 

    

   ``Yes, Saddam must be left humiliated and powerless - the president and our
allies know that. 

   It would be very bad and dangerous for us if Saddam Hussein remained in
power in Iraq with a substantial part of his huge army still intact, warned
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir. 

   .... 

   If left in power and well armed, his vindictiveness - when it came - would
be appalling. 

    

   ---

    

   The Leaf-Chronicle, Clarksville, Tenn.: 

    

   The U.N. coalition had no choice but to launch an all-out ground offensive
after Iraqi President Saddam Hussein ignored an ultimatum to begin withdrawing
his forces...The time for talk was over, and the people of Kuwait were begging
for liberation.... 

   Ultimately, Iraq has found itself without friends to call upon during this
war. The Arab masses in other countries never did rise up and rally to Iraq's
cause. In fact, the only Arab country that showed much sympathy to Iraq was
Jordan; but if it has made any contribution to Iraq's war effort, the effect
has been negligible... 

   ...The country prays for the U.N. combatants and for their families. We also
pray for those innocent people who have suffered in Kuwait. And we pray that
after this is all over, peace and stability will come to the Middle East. 

    

   ---

    

   The Oakland Press, Pontiac, Mich.: 

    

   While easy early successes can be misleading, it seems that the liberation
of Kuwait could come in days rather than weeks or months... 

   The urgent question is not whether a ground war is wise or necessary. That
has been answered, for better or worse, by George Bush and Saddam Hussein. 

   The question now is what happens after the last Iraqi soldier straggles back
across the Kuwaiti border and into Iraq? 

   Will the allied forces pursue him? And, if so, how far? 

   Then, what mechanism, if any, will be put in place in an attempt to head off
further military adventures in the region, by Saddam or anybody else?.... 

   ...So it is clear that an international conference should be convened to
deal with such questions as arms control for the region, recognition of the
right of Israel to exist and a permanent, humane solution to the Palestinian
problem in the occupied territories. 

   Ouside nations cannot continue to attempt to achieve stability by playing
off one Middle Eastern country against another. 

   That is how and why Saddam rose to power and prominence. And it was as much
the cynical doing of the United States as of anyone else. 

    

   ---

    

   Los Angeles Times: 

    

   Until it's evident that the Republican Guard has been neutralized as a
battlefield threat, and until it's clear that bloody street-to-street fighting
in Kuwait City can be avoided, the danger to allied forces will remain, and
anticipation of a quick and low-cost victory must be held in check. 

   Quite soon the world will get a firsthand look at Kuwait as it emerges from
more than six months of Iraqi subjugation. The stories and pictures are
expected to be grim. Even in the final hours of their occupation Iraqi forces
were reported to be heaping atrocity upon atrocity, murdering Kuwaitis,
stealing what had not earlier been looted, wantonly destroying the oil
installations and buildings. These are war crimes by any definition. If Kuwait
presses for the reparations that the U.N. resolutions and international law
allow it to claim, Iraq faces years of enormous compensations payments. 

    

   ---

    

   The Orange County Register: 

    

   ...Beyond that, and this comes as one more corroboration of Saddam's
unceasing diabolism, hundreds of men and women of Kuwait City were being
rounded up by their occupiers, tortured, and executed. 

   The moral impulse to stop the genocide which came on top of the torching of
Kuwait oil fields became all the more urgent. Other factors such as the looming
sand storm season no doubt factored in of course. And there was the weekend
story (confirmed) that the White House had established this timetable weeks
ago, authorizing Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf to launch the attack when ready. 

   That scandalized a small corps of reflexive Bush bashers who concluded that
the president was clearly not serious about the Saturday deadline and intended
to pursue some sort of sinister private agenda. 

   But those are uncomplicated minds at work, and, happily, they do not reflect
the overwhelming number of Americans who share the president's moral
sensibility. It is altogether reasonable to have planned a punitive timetable,
at the same time preparing to abandon it if the object of your enterprise
suddenly, and surprisingly, agrees to conduct himself in a civilized fashion.
Saddam responded to the Bush ultimatum with (1) some stalling-for-time joint
diplomacy with the Soviet Union and (2) more Scud attacks on Israel and Saudi
Arabia along with more hideous bloodletting in Kuwait City. 

   Astonishingly enough, the peacenik gallery complained that President Bush
failed to blind himself to the second part of Saddam's response which calls
into question their own morale posturing. That they invested an iota of
reliability in the Saddam-Gorbachev maneuvering called into question their
grasp of history. 

    

   ---

    

   Los Angeles Daily News: 

    

   The fear that Saddam inspired was simply the fear of the what-if: What if he
has chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction? What if he can get the
Arab masses to overthrow America's allies? What if his ground troops are
fanatics who will fight to the death? 

   The power in these questions is the power of the unknown. Once the answers
are known - once Saddam is forced to deliver and fails to measure up to the
worst




  Another file downloaded from:

         !
        -$-
         !      .
        /_\   /-o-\        & the Temple of the Screaming Electron
       (o..)    |      *           Walnut Creek, California
   +    |:|    /^\    /~\
   !    |:|/\ _| |____|:|     2400/1200/300 baud  415-935-5845
  /^\  /   O |/...\  /_-_\            Jeff Hunter, Sysop
  |@ \_| @  /:::::|/|- : -|                                  \
  |  | |  /~      |/|  _  |                  - - - - - - - - - *
  |____|/~ @  /~\ |/|_(_)_|       Aaaaaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!   /
      /_______|_|_|/

   Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,
       arcane knowledge, political extremism, diversive sexuality,
         insane speculation, and wild rumours. An ALL-TEXT BBS.

  Full access for first-time callers.  We don't want to know who you are,
   where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.

                         "Raw Data for Raw Nerves"

