President Clinton ordered what he called a "strong, sustained series of airstrikes" against Iraq yesterday in response to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's continued defiance of U.N. weapons inspections.

Meanwhile, Harvard affiliates with foreign policy and military expertise said to attack would be of dubious value in hindering Iraq's long-term military capability.

The attack, which began without warning at about 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, was designed to cripple Iraq's ability to produce nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, Clinton said in a nationally televised address from the Oval Office.

In Baghdad, witnesses said to missiles hit the capital after midnight Iraqi time, one near one of Hussein's biggest palaces. A defiant Hussein issued a statement that "wicked people" had bombed several targets, and he urged the Iraqi people to "fight of the nation, enemies of humanity."

"Operation Desert Fox", as the Pentagon dubbed the assault, was intended to last up to four days and involved American and British aircraft and U.S. warships. The Pentagon announced that extra aircraft and ground troops were being sent to the area.

Harvard foreign policy experts said they thought the attack will probably not discourage Iraq from developing weapons systems.

I think it's unlikely the bombing campaign will physically slow down his campaign to build weapons of mass destruction", said retired Army Lt. Gen. J. Terry Scott, director of the national security program at the Kennedy School of Government(KSG). "Anything he's got that's vital is deep underground right now".

But others said the U.S. had very few viable alternatives.

Doing something like this may well be the least worst thing", said Francis M. Bator, Littauer professor of political economy emeritus at the KSG and a deputy national security advisor to former President Johnson.

And Scott added that the bombings "will certainly serve notice to [Hussein] that there's...a price to be paid for playing games with the UNSCOM [U.N. Special Commission] inspectors".

Clinton said he acted "to protect the national interest of the United States" and Iraq's neighbors in the Middle East. He gave the go-ahead after consulting with his top advisers and reviewing a U.N. report that said Hussein had again failed to fulfill weapons inspectors.

"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear weapons, poison gas or biological weapons", Clinton said. "I have no doubt today that, left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again".

Clinton Cautioned that unintended civilian casualties were a certainty.

Speaking to reporters later, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright said the attacks were not designed to "get Saddam Hussein". But she said the United States would step up its contacts with opposition groups and "work with them in a sustained way".

In the charged political atmosphere of the day, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) criticized the military action even before Clinton announced it.

"While I have been assured by administration officials that there is no connection with the impeachment process in the House of Representatives, I cannot support this military action in the Persian Gulf at this time", his statement said.