What's taking Saddam so long...

[PsychoCop]

...to use those 'weapons of mass destruction' that Bush has been accusing him of hiding.

I mean, the U.S. has already gone deep enough into Iraq, I think it's about damn time that he AT LEAST used some gas bombs on those U.S. soldiers, right?

Hey, if MY regime was on the verge of collapsing, I might as well go on ahead and take everyone down with me, right? Sheesh. that Saddam's such an idiot, no wonder he's losing to the Americans in this war. Time to let out some of that Anthrax, Mustard Gas, whatever hydco-carbon-whajamacallit stuff he has stacked in his secret chem plants.

Are you actually wanted him to use such tactics because that would be just sad on your part if that were the case? The weapons inspectors were given years on end and you are only willing to give the coalition 15 some odd days. Wouldn't it be better if we found the WMD as opposed to having them used on us?

[Taur]

The media is also trying very hard to find these biological weapons.

Yesterday paper page 1A "White chemical substance found in factory."
Todays paper page 27F "White substance discovered to be gunpowder"

Believe me, you will be the first to know with page 1 reporting on Sadams chemical weapons. But, don't forget to turn to the last page of the paper to read "The Rest of The Story".

[dread]

It is kind of suprising that no chemical weapons have been used. Saddam has nothing really to lose now anyway, he is basically a dead man walking, guess he should have took all his money and joined Idi Amin in exile in saudi arabia sipping margaritas with the rich oil sheiks.

[mrskippy]

War ain't over yet. Wait until troops get into the middle of town. Saddam will throw chem-bio and than blame America for throwing them. You watch.

And that Scud at Israel. My prediction all along has been he'll wait until lots of troops are in Baghdad, hurl something Israel's way and watch as Israel resists hurting Americans or the other way around.

But why does everyone want him to use chem-bio. Wouldn't it be better to win the war and than find the damning evidence, without losing American's to a cruel form of warfare?

[GrantDawg]

My prediction? Saddam has no intention of dying. He will not use WMD because he wasn't to be a living martyr, go in front of a world court, and claim he has been wronged. He is going to do one of three things:

1) Run to Syria (if he is not already there). The main reason he might not do this is he would have to put huge trust into another government for his protection. Might not be willing to do that.

2) Give himself up. Second the military enters the building he is in he gives up. We will have more trouble with him alive in custody than dead.

3) Try to stay hidden in Iraq and pull a coup as soon as he finds a weakness. This would be very hard to pull off, but he might like the idea.

If he uses chemical weapons, he will lose any opportunity to have the support of other countries. He wants to keep that. I keep hearing one report of chemical weapons residue being found in the Euphrates. Having his people dump it in the last minutes to try to hide its existence would play into him surrendering eventually.

[mrskippy]

2) Give himself up. Second the military enters the building he is in he gives up. We will have more trouble with him alive in custody than dead.

If they confront Saddam face to face, he'll be shot dead!!!

[Fritz]

Weapons of mass destruction require a delivery system of some sort, command and control, and sufficient quantities of material on hand to make the effort worth your while. It is very possible that Iraq does not have all three.

I have more concern for a possible nuclear warhead that may have made its way south after the collapse of the Soviet Union .

[Fritz]

Originally posted by mrskippy
If they confront Saddam face to face, he'll be shot dead!!!

Just like we did to Noriega.

[mrskippy]

Maybe they make Noriega and Saddam cellmates!!!

[JPhillips]

Grantdawg: I've been saying all along that I thought he wouldn't use chemweapons because when he is defeated he can claim to be an innocent victim of American imperialism. For the troops' sake, I sure hope I'm right.

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by Fritz
Weapons of mass destruction require a delivery system of some sort, command and control, and sufficient quantities of material on hand to make the effort worth your while. It is very possible that Iraq does not have all three.

Good point, Fritz. Here's an article describing the difficulty in delivering an attack even with possession of chem or bio weapons.

Devils in the Delivery

[mrskippy]

Weapons of mass destruction require a delivery system of some sort, command and control, and sufficient quantities of material on hand to make the effort worth your while. It is very possible that Iraq does not have all three.

I've heard that one tactic would be to take those chemical drums, set them in the bath of soldiers, and than fire an RPG at them blowing them up. This would disperse the chemicals. However, the risk is that the wind might blow it back on the Iraqi forces.

There doesn't need to be a rocket or missile to deliver the goods.

Also, it's still possible Iraq could have a dirty bomb.

[tucker342]

Good point Fritz...

[dread]

I, as a former NBC recon person definately would not want a chemical attack upon our troops, but what i think many are pointing to is that Iraq does not seem to have the resources to have been a major threat to us which is debatable and not of much importance anymore since we have already attacked Iraq. I think a chemical attack would give us a big problem esp the ground troops. The tanks and bradleys have some filitration that would protect them fairly well from chemical attack, but I very much doubt that the ground troops would be able to react well enough to an immediate chemical threat that nobody has ever been through. The live agent training that very few troops have been through is in a very controlled environment, no incoming fire, no desert heat and no real sense that your life could end.