While Israel opens gas mask distribution centers and deploys Patriot missiles against possible attack by Iraq, the American people remain safe from any retaliation by Saddam Hussein and Iraq. I pray that Israelis won't pay for Clinton's actions or inactions, with any more of their blood. Isreali General Amos Gilad said, " If he ( Saddam ) is on the brink of extinction, he certainly may take suicidal steps involving the launching of a few missiles against Israel ". I sincerely hope this attack was not a staged media event! Getting these reservations off my chest, here are the possible problems with bombing Iraq at this time.

First, I think it was a bad choice of names for the operation. " Desert Fox " either brings up the old World War II images of the German general Erwin Rommel ( though a good tactician, still a soldier of the vicious Third Reich ) or " Fox " draws out the image of running away ( as in the fox and the hounds ). Maybe this was a Freudian slip on Clinton's part?

Second, and infinitely more important, is the acheived results of this bombing campaign.

We just can't waste millions of our taxpayer dollars on cruise missile attacks that destroy innocent aspirin factories or tents in the middle of nowhere! Targets must be those that have to do with Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Scott Ritter opined that most of the important Iraqi assests had been moved to different locations, prior to the attacks that began yesterday! What can be gained by bombing empty buildings?

Taking out anti-aircraft sites and command and control facilities sounds good on the surface, but these sites don't produce the weapons we are concerned about. There had better be some visible results of massive damage to locations where weapons or research was going on. General Henry Shelton showed some before and after pictures of destroyed barracks buildings. What did these have to do with manufacturing weapons? If there isn't this clear cut evidence ( and not some baloney bordering on more dog wagging, like after the phoney attacks on Ossama Bin Laden back in August ), it will become clear to all, that Clinton did initiate this bombing for a change in media coverage and headlines!

Bombing all of Saddam's palaces may make him mad, but what proof do we have that he was making big bombs at these so-called palaces?

Bombing Iraqi military assests like airfields or Republican Guard artillery units, both capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, would be good choices, but they may be hard to locate and/or obliterate effectively!

Obviously, support and decry were present thoughout the globe. Countries openly voicing their support included: Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, and Spain. Countries condemning the attacks included: India, Iran, Pakistan, Red China, and Russia. France, Indonesia and Mexico were non-committal but stressed restraint and the destructive nature of the attacks.

Though not connected with the results of the bombing of Iraq, Netanyahu did say one thing that may be in support of the timing of these recent attacks on Iraq. He said, when Clinton was leaving Israel, " He told me that he was about to get a very difficult report by Richard Butler on Iraq's failure to fulfill its commitments, and that it apparently would obligate him to act ". Ofcourse, this report didn't obligate him to act the day before the impeachment vote, or did it?

I believe a better choice would have been to organize anti-Saddam Iraqis at safe havens in the no fly zones, then begin a bombing campaign! Saddam must be removed from within, and Saddam is the actual problem, not the majority of the Iraqi people. Luckily, no American or British casualties have been reported, as the hundreds of cruise missiles that hit Iraq were preceeded by manned fighters, firing HARM radar site destroying missiles.

- Bongo ( I want bomb camera video tape, where is my bomb camera video tape? )