A bitter debate is raging in the Bush administration over how to topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, newspaper reports said today.
|
|
President Saddam Hussein
|
The civilian leadership is pushing for innovative plans that would use smaller numbers of troops, but military planners favour more cautious approaches that would employ far larger forces, the
Washington Post
reported today.
The newspaper said Vice President Mr Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary Mr Donald Rumsfeld favour aggressively confronting Hussein. They argue he presents a serious threat and that time is not on the side of the United States, the paper reported.
But much of the senior uniformed military opposes going to war any time soon, according to reports.
|
Secretary of State Mr Colin Powell and CIA Director Mr George Tenet are reported to be posing skeptical questions about a military campaign and what happens after Saddam is gone, the
Post
said.
People involved in the planning said the reason so many different plans and variations have surfaced is that wildly different assumptions are being made about the nature of the war, the newspaper said.
"There's obviously a lot going on about how to do this," one senior administration official. "There's no right way or wrong way. It's difficult because you don't know which countries you can count on or what the consequences in the region would be".
Officials said the administration is in the early stages of talks on approaches to attacking Iraq and that no formal plan has been put to President Bush, according to the newspaper.
The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee was told last night that, without US intervention, Iraq is likely to develop nuclear weapons within two years as part of a secret weapons programme.