Replies

It is very easy to dispose of Chemical or Biological weapons and to do it in a hurry. But why wouldn't Sadaam have used them against our troops?

Several possible explanations exist. Saddam could have destroyed or hidden WMDs just before the war began. We may have destroyed them ourselves in air strikes, artillery strikes, or by other means. The Iraqis may have heeded our warnings not to use these weapons. The Iraqis may have realized that we were too well protected, or at least that we were much better protected for such attacks than they were. Or some combination of the foregoing.

We are less secure now than we were before the war in my opinion.

I certainly disagree. If Saddam could give Al Queada (or whoever) WMDs during the war, he certainly could have given them these weapons at any time, and in much greater quantities, than he can now. Iraq under Saddam was no different in principle from the Taliban prior to 9/11, except that Iraq could potentially cause us much more harm if and when it finally did attack (either directly or through a terrorist organization).

The Iraqis may have heeded our warnings not to use these weapons.

I thought of that before you posted your reply. We did extensive psy-op work in Iraq before the invasion making the point that any commander who used chem or bio weapons would meet a bad end. That may have had an effect. But I still can't see at least some of those die hard Baathist or "Fedeyeen" types not using them at least once.

I think the reason Iraq would not have given WMD's to AQ or other such types before the war is that he valued his life and regime. And surely if we had such info that he did we would have made it public. Chem and Bio weapons have "signatures" once used and can be traced. Sadaam was just like Stalin- a murderous madman. And just like Stalin he loved his power and wanted to stay alive. I don't see Sadaam giving WMD to extremists like Osama in peacetime. But - with nothing to lose and America about to invade- why not give WMD to whomever? I don't think we are safer. Maybe - if Iraq does indeed become a stable Democratic regime and example of prosperity to the rest of the Middle East and thus cause revolutions then we will be ultimatley secure. But I Don't see that security for 5 to 10 years.