Blair prepares for biological war threat

afp ^ | 4/14/02

[knak]

BRITISH Prime Minister Tony Blair ordered 16 million doses of the smallpox vaccine after US Vice-President Dick Cheney warned Iraq could counter military action with a biological terror onslaught.

The two leaders met at Downing Street on March 12 and exchanged intelligence about the possible threat from Iraq.

Cheney told Blair that intelligence experts had warned that the US and Britain would be the two main targets of biological warfare in the event of a conflict, London's Sunday Telegraph said.

US reports, according to the paper, suggested that Saddam Hussein would use all the weapons at his disposal if he was attacked.

Unlike the Gulf War, where he showed some restraint, this time he would know that the military action is intended to end in his death or capture, it added.

Two days after Cheney and Blair met, six government health officials, including Health Secretary Alan Milburn, met in London and decided to order inoculations against smallpox.

The Sunday Telegraph said that in the event of a war being launched against the West, Iraqi special agents would try to smuggle smallpox into Britain and release it in confined spaces such as the Tube (underground system) or cinemas.

The worst case would be suicide terrorists infected with smallpox, the paper added.

Earlier this year US scientists projected how smallpox infections would spread after a single terrorist strike, according to the paper.

They found that an attack on a train on April 1 would result in 15,000 cases of smallpox, including 2000 deaths, by June. The disease would also spread to four foreign countries, they calculated. BRITISH Prime Minister Tony Blair ordered 16 million doses of the smallpox vaccine after US Vice-President Dick Cheney warned Iraq could counter military action with a biological terror onslaught.

The two leaders met at Downing Street on March 12 and exchanged intelligence about the possible threat from Iraq.

Cheney told Blair that intelligence experts had warned that the US and Britain would be the two main targets of biological warfare in the event of a conflict, London's Sunday Telegraph said.

US reports, according to the paper, suggested that Saddam Hussein would use all the weapons at his disposal if he was attacked.

Unlike the Gulf War, where he showed some restraint, this time he would know that the military action is intended to end in his death or capture, it added.

Two days after Cheney and Blair met, six government health officials, including Health Secretary Alan Milburn, met in London and decided to order inoculations against smallpox.

The Sunday Telegraph said that in the event of a war being launched against the West, Iraqi special agents would try to smuggle smallpox into Britain and release it in confined spaces such as the Tube (underground system) or cinemas.

The worst case would be suicide terrorists infected with smallpox, the paper added.

Earlier this year US scientists projected how smallpox infections would spread after a single terrorist strike, according to the paper.

They found that an attack on a train on April 1 would result in 15,000 cases of smallpox, including 2000 deaths, by June. The disease would also spread to four foreign countries, they calculated.

[knak]

wonderful

[GeronL]

ordered 16 million doses from who?? The US is diluting what we can find lost in storage!!

[JohnHuang2]

Thanks for the ping, amigo.

[11B3]

Iraq, like Al Queda, is merely a pawn or a puppet. China holds the strings.

[The Great Satan]

Nearly there, nearly there. Smallpox is a code word for "anthrax" here, IMO. Just as Blair's recent threat to attack Iraq with nuclear weapons if Saddam hits our "troops" with biological weapons was a polite way to to talk about attacks against our civilian population -- the prospect which is made explicit here. The word-games remind me of the way the Victorians talked about sex. Their purpose? It's a fine balancing act: the people must gradually be prepared for the truth, but they mustn't be paralysed with fear -- the threat must still be kept "hypothetical." That balance needs to be incrementally modulated as we get closer to the showdown with Saddam Hussein. Judging by the news stories of the last 2-3 weeks, the pace is picking up -- the final conflict with the Butcher of Baghdad may come as soon as the fall.

[Nogbad]

ping

[Lion's Cub]

Thanks for the ping. I read a similar story from a British paper yesterday, but I didn't save the link.

BTW, if anyone wants to follow the stories on smallpox, check the *Smallpox List, which is located at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/involved?group=161

[The Great Satan]

The Sunday Telegraph said that in the event of a war being launched against the West, Iraqi special agents would try to smuggle smallpox into Britain and release it in confined spaces such as the Tube (underground system) or cinemas.

This is a nice example of how these scenarios are subtly sanitized for public consumption. Of course, if Saddam is planning such an operation, he would have already forward-positioned his agents here -- he wouldn't wait until we are at war to send people in. Which means that the agents are living amongst us right now, just like -- dare I mention it? -- the agents who carried out 9/11. Psychologically, that is a lot harder to deal with, no? I mean, if it was unacceptable that the Soviets would station ICBMs a few minutes fly time off the coast of Florida, how should we feel about human ICBMs living bedsits in Brooklyn and Notting Hill?

[Robert_Paulson2]

Hence the orders are not given to deport. Upon mass deportation, agents in deep cover would ACTIVATE their cells, BEFORE we had the vaccines in place... Bush won't close the borders and export the aliens, because they would activate. They can however be picked off one or two at a time...

I suspect However, if they had the weapons... they WOULD have used them during the attacks on afghanistan by US forces.

Truth is we may NEVER attack Iraq DIRECTLY either. Who knows how sadaam will leave this earth. It may not even be an act of war, or espionage.

Nobody lives forever. . . some folks just fade away. . .

[aristeides]

Mounting such an attack would be a severe risk to the Iraqis concerned. Seems to me the attack of which you speak would be worth much more than $1B to us, say, $100B.

[spitz]

Whoever "tops" Saddam gets the prize, Iraq. What’s it worth to the Iraqi’s to end this without having their country turned to dust?

In any civilised country you would have to consider the alternatives.

[Ranger]

I call to your attention the Minuteman test last week with special guidance system employed for improved accuracy. I am wondering if an ICBM strike on Iraq perhaps with low yield nukes is the plan of attack against bio/chem and command and control (Saddam et al) targets.

[EternalHope]

I suspect However, if they had the weapons... they WOULD have used them during the attacks on afghanistan by US forces.

If the anthrax were under the control of Al Qaida, yes.

However, the anthrax sent as a warning last fall was of such high quality that Al Qaida could not possibly have been the maker (nor could a lone nutcase).

There are only two candidates with the technology to make anthrax of this quality: Russia and Iraq. Since it was not used when we took out Afghanistan, it must be assumed that the maker kept control of its use. You can bet Saddam Hussein and sons will use it against us if they see their own downfall coming.

Hence, the need for a VERY, VERY fast surgical strike to take out Saddam and his family.

Immediate take out of a deeply buried bunker is not guaranteed with a ground burst of even a relatively large nuke, and the fallout would be a problem. We would need to know the exact underground location of the bunker, which will be far enough from the surface entrances to be safe. That would require intel that a satellite cannot provide.

We might try specially designed tactical nukes capable of burying themselves deep in the ground before they go off. They could be used on ALL of the entrances and would have a good chance of cutting off communications even if Saddam were not immediately killed. The problem is, these weapons apparently are in the talking stage only.

Taking out a defended bunker with commandos might be possible, but would take enough time that "go" codes could still be sent by Saddam. It might work if all communications could be cut at the same time as the attack, but that would be very difficult.

Catching Saddam while he is in-transit would work fine, especially if his sons were in transit at the same time. We would need excellent intel and a lot of luck.

Bottom line: We have no sure way to pick off Saddam so fast that he could not send a "go" code before we got him. I think we will give it a try, but we will have to be prepared to fail in the attempt.

If Saddam has smallpox, large quantities of anthrax, or both, then literally millions of lives are at stake. Be thankful you are not the person who has to make this decision.

[EternalHope]

Surely, just surely, someone in Saddam's inner circle can be bribed to make this happen. It would be worthwhile spending $1B in reward money.

Saddam is a genius at self preservation. He just went through another of his purges, just to be sure.

If you want to live a long life, do not become one of Saddam's generals.

[EternalHope]

I call to your attention the Minuteman test last week with special guidance system employed for improved accuracy. I am wondering if an ICBM strike on Iraq perhaps with low yield nukes is the plan of attack against bio/chem and command and control (Saddam et al) targets.

I missed that test. Thanks for the info.

Iraq would get essentially no warning from an ICBM attack (unless Russia told 'em). They come in so high and so fast that most radar systems do not even see them. Even those that do give very little warning, and I doubt Iraq even has them.

That said, I doubt President Bush will approve a first use of nuclear weapons. However, if weapons of mass of destruction have already been used against us, count on it.

Likewise, if weapons of mass destruction are used against Israel, I expect to see nuclear retaliation from Israel.

We live in dangerous times.

[cicero's_son]

I'm not nearly as informed as TGS and Eternal Hope, but this seems implausible to me as well. We are dealing with something of an evil genius in Saddam. He has had 10 years to plan his endgame. That endgame cannot simply consist of a single short-term deterrent that would itself be nullified in the event of Saddam's assassination.

My fear is that he is much closer to having nukes than we realize. Is that why he is running out the clock? Nukes, as I think TGS pointed out, essentially prevent us from massing troops anywhere in the world, making it impossible to project American force.

Or maybe the Anthrax threat is EVEN WORSE than we realize. Maybe it cannot be neutralized at all. Maybe we will never go to war with him. Or maybe President Bush will have to decide that it's either hundreds of thousands of us now or millions of us later.

[Thud]

ping

[knak]

If you want to live a long life, do not become one of Saddam's generals.

Ain't that the truth. He reminds me of Hildabeast, look at her wrong and your fired! or dead?

[The Great Satan]

That endgame cannot simply consist of a single short-term deterrent that would itself be nullified in the event of Saddam's assassination.

I doubt we will risk taking him out with a sudden blow, since it is perfectly possible that he has a pre-arranged revenge protocol. Hell, that's the way both sides set it up during the Cold War. MAD doesn't work if all one side has to do is take out the other side's main man in a preemptive strike. Looking at the kind of personnel Saddam was able to gather for the 9/11 operation, the agents might well follow through, even after the jig is up for their boss. I suspect that the "regime change" Bush has promised will involve a more subtle approach.