Posted on 08/18/2002 1:17:45 AM PDT by efnwriter
War on Iraq
Saddam and Iran Prepare WMD
efreedomnews.com
by Jonathan Rhodes August 15, 2002
Saddam cannot win a war with the US, if the US has the will to win. However, if he attacks first and achieves military control over much of the middle east, he can reach a position of strength to negotiate from and may not only maintain his power but extend it.
First, the disinformation campaign while Saddam Prepares Preemptive Attacks
Iraq invited chief U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix to visit Baghdad for technical talks on Aug. 1. However, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told Iraq, by formal letter, that it must accept the U.N. Security Council's terms for the return of weapons inspectors before such talks take place.
Iraq has not yet replied to Annan's letter.
On August 10, 2002, Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan told Abu Dhabi Television that Baghdad was willing to discuss the return of inspectors -as long as there were no conditions to the discussions:
"Iraq is ready to discuss the return of the U.N. weapons inspectors, provided that any dialogue with the United Nations takes place with no preconditions."
On August 12 Baghdad said return of UN weapons inspectors was unnecessary:
"To say, as the United States does, that Iraq possesses prohibited weapons is pure invention. The teams of inspectors finished their work," Information Minister Mohammad Said al-Sahhaf told a Qatar-based Al-Jazeera satellite television channel from Baghdad.
"The work of the United Nations according to Chapter C of resolution 687 on the so-called prohibited arms has been accomplished." he said.
The August 10 Ramadan interview was not aired in full until today, August 15, 2002, (although it was widely reported on August 10th). Even the supposedly accurate Associated Press has been confused by this disinformation campaign as they reported Ramadan's August 10 remarks as "...appear(ing) to back down from his strong opposition to the return of inspectors," in an article dated August 15, 2002 titled Iraq Ready for Return of Inspectors .
Are you confused now? Don't be - Saddam is just using disinformation to stall as he prepares to launch an attack into Jordan and Israel on his way to Middle Eastern hegemony.
That story, being virtually ignored by news outlets like the AP, is very clear, and very, very serious.
One article, not picked up by the wire services, was written by Bill Gertz for The Washington Times. - Iraqi Germ Plant Active. Research by efreedomnews has expanded on Mr. Gertz's report.
US and Israeli satellites have picked up large convoys of trucks leaving the Taji Single Cell Protein Plant, 6 miles northwest of Baghdad. The destination: The Zagros Mountains - 12,000 to 15,000 feet high and nearly impassable. The convoys stop at two sites 20 to 30 kilometers inside the Iranian border in Kermanshah Province near the suburbs of Khorram-Abad and the other in the Harour Hills in the Khorram Abad region.
Taji is a main chemical, biological and nuclear weapons manufacturing center.
The plant was converted by the Iraqis into a biological-weapons production facility and subsequently bombed during the 1991 Persian Gulf war. After the war, U.N. weapons inspectors uncovered evidence that Iraq had used the site to fill Scud-missile warheads with deadly VX nerve agent. The Taji plant produced hundreds of gallons of Botulinum toxin during the late 1980s and had a spore drier capable of producing up to a kilogram of weaponized dried spores a day for Botulinum and anthrax.
The Taji plant was the planned location for a centrifuge uranium-enrichment program for nuclear weapons production. The program was believed to have been halted after 1991, but Iraq has since purchased equipment for centrifuge enrichment.
Since 1997 Saddam has fully rebuilt the plant and protected it with Republican Guard tank divisions.
So clearly, convoys of trucks leaving Taji would be transporting WMD weapons or the equipment to make WMD weapons. Saddam would like to keep this state of the art WMD factory intact. The two destination sites in the Zagros are tunnels built in the mid-1970's by the Shah of Iran. After his fall in 1979 when Jimmy Carter abandoned him, a Revolutionary Guard (Pazdaran) force was permanently stationed at the tunnels site. In early 1998 the tunnels were modernized and greatly strengthened against air attacks.
This preservation of WMD capability is so important to Saddam that he has put his son and probable heir Qusay in command of the project. Bagher Zolghadr, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on the Iran-Iraq border, heads up the Iranian end of the operation.
DEBKAfile reports: Iran’s ulterior motive in providing safekeeping for Saddam’s WMD resources is simple. According to our intelligence sources, Iran commands nothing nearly as advanced as Iraq in the way of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons-making equipment. Helping Saddam will lend Iran’s experts free access to Iraq’s state of the art equipment and a chance to copy and assimilate technology that cost Iraq billions of dollars to develop.
Other reports indicate that Baghdad is developing rail cars that could be used to develop or transport biological weapons agents. "They're buying dual-use capability," SecDef Rumsfeld said during a visit to a military base in Suffolk, Va. "A biological laboratory can be on wheels in a trailer and make a lot of bad stuff, and it's movable, and it looks like most any other trailer."
The most worrisome aspect of safeguarding the WMD manufacturing equipment movement is that Saddam feels comfortable with his current stocks of WMD materials and deployment.
There are unsubstantiated reports that Saddam has up to 20 "dirty bombs" and 6 to 10 active nuclear weapons that can be launched by missile or jet aircraft.
Saddam continues to prepare for immediate preemptive WMD strikes against US troops already in the Kurdish area of northern Iraq, as well as those located at the Jordanian air bases at Ar Ruwayshid in the east, Wadi el-Murbah to the north and al-Mafraq in the west. The Turkish air base at Incirlik is also high on the Iraqi target list.
On August 8, 2002, Saddam gave a speech to the Iraqi people and said:
“The forces of evil [United States] will carry their coffins on their backs, to die in disgraceful failure, taking their schemes back with them, or to dig their own graves after they bring death to themselves on all Arab or Muslim soil against which they perpetrate aggression, including Iraq, the land of Jihad and the banner.”
“Charge on, charge on, charge on…the beloved chant is raised, as though our men are circumambulating the Qa’ba or returning to the place from which the Prophet Mohammed, the Messenger of Allah, ascended to God on that Blessed Night, after they cleanse the land of Palestine of Zionist desecration.” [Israel]
Of course Israel is a prime target for Saddam. Yesterday, civilian residents of Jerusalem were distributed iodine tablets to be taken in the event of a nuclear attack and 100,000 smallpox vaccinations were initiated, given to "first responders" - military, medical and rescue team personnel.
Companion, synchronous massed Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel, coordinated by Yasser Arafat, and WMD attacks on New York and Washington by pre-positioned sleeper terrorist cells are integral to Saddam's plan.
After the initial WMD attacks, Saddam's plan is to launch an all out invasion of Jordan. He has met with Syrian President Assad and attempted to persuade him to join the pan-Arabic war and attack Israel from the Golan Heights.
To elucidate the reality of this Iraqi scenario, 4000 US troops arrived at Jordan’s Aqaba port on the Red Sea Monday, August 12 with loads of Bradley fighting vehicles and helicopters on ships hastily chartered by the US Navy. [DOD Briefing, Straitstimes, Navy Leases Transports]
SecDef Rumsfeld claimed this was for a long scheduled "exercise" with Jordan's armed forces.
Jordan's closure of the local branch of Al-Jazeera television last week will result in minimal Arab news coverage of these troop movements.
Most likely, the real reason for the deployment is to protect Jordan’s main highways between the port of Aqaba, Amman and the northern air bases as well as highways directly into Israel to the west; to protect against the Iraqi invasion of Jordan, and Israel.
This may all be saber rattling by Saddam, but the escalating troop and equipment movement on both sides, the Israeli precautions and the activity around Taji portends Saddam may not be willing to wait for the US to rain bombs on him and systematically take Iraq apart before he responds. His first attack has to be lethal - he knows he will not get a second chance.
The only problem with your story is how it ends. Weeks later. It should have ended, "Within hours of deployment, nuclear bombers ringed the landing sight with ten mega ton bombs on advancing Chinese columns, while marines landed at the landing site and rescued the crew. Once evacuated from the site, the entire landing field was nuked out of existence. All returned safely home the following week."
...talk...
Maybe to people who dont understand the capabilities of the US Military and lack thereof of the Iraqis and Iranians [Of which there seems to be a great many participating in this thread including its originator].
Their sanity has no impact on either.
Isn't a lack of strong intel the pits?
Another creator of magic sentences not supported by facts. Back it up with legitimate polling numbers [The only way you could discern public support] or from here on out I'll beat you over the head with this quote.
Can anyone confirm the story I read years ago about the US navy sinking half the Iranian navy in one night, and the only thing that saved the other half was they simply were not in the region?
Secondly, The U.S. would never allow it to happen in the first place. We could take out most of their Scuds in a few hours, and our Patriot ABM technology is considerably more advanced than it was a decade ago. With several batteries of Patriots devoted to each Scud, I'd be very suprised if even one of them made it to its target.
You're absolutely right about Saddam being a madman and caring not a whit for his people, but I think you're severely underestimating the military prowess and sophistication of both Israel and the U.S. ...And the idea of Sharon surrendering to Saddam is downright laughable.
Saddam's insanity IS his strong negotiating position. Israel can vaporized Baghdad and Iraqi scuds will just keep on flying. It will be Sharon's moment of realization that the only way he can stop the scuds is to agree to Iraq's terms of surrender. Killing Iraqis won't do it!!!
Log off and never speak of this again.
Excuse me? Do you know Sharon?
If given only the choice of annihilation, Sharon would nuke every Muslim in the world.
But that was not my scenario. To Sharon, Israel's EXISTENCE is everything. He will surrender under some terms (paying tribute, adopting some laws, retaining nukes) to keep the state of Israel from going under.
In my scenario, he won't have any other choice. And in my scenario, you cannot provide him with one that would work to save Israel as a state. Thus, he will choose life for Israel over extinction even under terrible circumstances looking for the day their Messiah comes to liberate them from their enemies.
1991 didnot demonstrate this ability whatsoever. What do you know of our improvements to detect and destroy, seeing that we have less troops in the region?
I already told you, we've upgraded our Patriots considerably since the Gulf War. I've read about it in several military journals over the past couple of years, and I'll link you up after I dig through some online archives.
And remember, Saddam has a very limited number of Scuds. He's already shot most of his impotent load.
The US has a powerful airforce I will admit, but when you are in someone elses backyard, you need to be carful, or do you forget the US Cole was attacked with just a simple rubber boat, so no need to out-manouver anyone.
You do not fight the larger more powerful enemy (US) at its mode of battle, but the one of your choosing, obviously you have not read Sun Tzu
These people are not interested in consequenses, they would be in a holy war and prepared to die for their course, whereas Allied troops, would be trying there best to keep out of arms way.
Kamakazi, Plastinian Suicide Bomber or Tamil Tigers and Vietnamese, all people who were prepared to die for their freedom.
They would not attack with tanks or armies the oil fields of Saudi, but would use WMB as I mentioned, so would be un-usable by anyone for a long time.
Like wise the Strait of Hormuz leaves, Bahrain, Qatar or any of the emirates just minutes away from attack and they are so small, they would be obliterated in matter of hours. (IRan is too large to hit all the airfilds or missle sites in a matter of hours, once the attack began, the missiles would start flowing.
The US and its allies taking over the oilfields of Iran and Iraq, well my friend, we would then see the true meaning of the word "Jihad" and I would recommend investing in a company that sells bodybags, as we would need them by the ship load.
They would not need to attack them with their navy, rubber dingy was enough to take out the USS Cole, but Rockets from anywhere on the Strait's of Hormuz would have catastophic conseqences. (Check out the map on message #4)
It would be madness to attack the US with ships or jets, as we all know they would be outnumbered and destroyed easily, unless of course they have exercet missles from France, which I am sure have improved a lot since the falkland Island war. Then they were fired from longer distances than the width of the Strait of Hormuz.
I am, I have lived with these terrorists for a few years. You assume that they will not fire because we will fire back. What pray tell was 9-11? I have no doubt they will fire. They really are that crazy. MAD does not work if one side wants to die in a blaze of glory. To think that it would work with a Jihad is, well, mad.
We better learn to think eastern, and fast.
I figure we are going in because of the Anthrax mailed in the US, and expect the worst.
You and I agree, read Isaiah 14-19 and Jer 49-51. They descibe just that.
I asked you how Iran would take Bahrain....you didnt reply.
"The Strait of Hormuz needs to be nagigated by all US ships, and the coast of Iran runs the length of it. Hundreds and Hundred of Miles, with a very narrow and difficult turn. The US could be attacked at any stage."
And the vessels already in the Persian Gulf and in the Arabian Gulf? How would they be destroyed? How would their response be defeated? Or is it your assertion that the US navy would line their ships up one after another and send them into Iranian fire while holding their own?
"The US has a powerful airforce I will admit, but when you are in someone elses backyard, you need to be carful, or do you forget the US Cole was attacked with just a simple rubber boat, so no need to out-manouver anyone."
What? One has nothing to do with the other...you acknowledged that the US air force is supreme and then offer up some high school augury to erase speaking anymore and exposing your lack of operational knowledge.
"You do not fight the larger more powerful enemy (US) at its mode of battle, but the one of your choosing, obviously you have not read Sun Tzu"
Oi...you cant be this dense. If you just abandon your position now, I will fully understand. To continue to talk in vague admonitions and Hokie forboding is only making you look foolish.
"These people are not interested in consequenses, they would be in a holy war and prepared to die for their course, whereas Allied troops, would be trying there best to keep out of arms way."
You mean the same way the Syrians were forced to chain their soldiers to Anti-Tank and Anti-Aircraft guns lining the approaches to Damascus because they were fleeing in light of Israeli advance? An asinine, disrespectful sideline comment that doesnt require futher consideration.
"They would not attack with tanks or armies the oil fields of Saudi, but would use WMB as I mentioned, so would be un-usable by anyone for a long time."
Really....how about 24 to 36 hours depending upon the wind direction in the AO. Neither has Nuclear weapons and those are the only ones that would accomplish what you claim.
"Like wise the Strait of Hormuz leaves, Bahrain, Qatar or any of the emirates just minutes away from attack and they are so small, they would be obliterated in matter of hours."
Again, by what? Show me the Iranian military equipment that will bring this about? Show me the Iranian military equipment that can defeat American tactics.
"Iran is too large to hit all the airfilds or missle sites in a matter of hours, once the attack began, the missiles would start flowing."
Missiles tipped with what?
"The US and its allies taking over the oilfields of Iran and Iraq, well my friend, we would then see the true meaning of the word "Jihad" and I would recommend investing in a company that sells bodybags, as we would need them by the ship load."
There is already a shipload of something right here....it's called a BS from a guy who has absolutely no relative military or combat experience. Who does not know the combat capabilities of the forces involved or the logistical requirements to accomplish what he proposes is remotely possible.
You really should humble up and walk away. You are light years out of your league here.
Neither Iran or Iraq posses Nuclear weapons or the capability to effectively deliver them. What amount of chemical weapons they do have will remain where they are as a result of the absolute certainty that the government who employs them first and the popuation it rules will be on the receiving end of a Nuclear response. Neither has the ability to take or hold foreign terrain in light of the American presence that already exists in the region.
Air Supremacy is already in American hands.
No sizable armoured force [A requirement in invading another country] can move from Iraq or Iran and not be destroyed the moment it is percieved as a threat. No Iranian or Iraqi Air force could take flight and effectively engage American aircraft or air defenses. For any ground force to make an effective assault across any border means they would first have to lay down comm and bring up their supporting artillery...all of which we can see...once Iran or Iraq did this they would be met with an American counter move to negate what they intend to do.
Those are the baseline realities that you cannot argue against.
Those are the baseline realities that decapitate your assertions.
I dont mind people brainstorming....it is healthy....but to brainstorm you have to be competent in the subject you are discussing. To this point, you have not been. You have no facts...only Sun Tzu quotes and thirty year old examples of military desperation.
You continue to disregard the absolute that if either Iran or Iraq employed biological or chemical weapons the US response would effectively end the debate and the conflict.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.