Skip to comments.
SOLDIER'S CHILLING WARNING
Sky News ^
| Last Updated: 09:04 UK, Monday March 10, 2003
Posted on 03/10/2003 1:10:18 AM PST by maquiladora
An Iraqi defector has told Sky News that Saddam Hussein will use chemical weapons if the country is invaded.
In an exclusive interview, the man said the use of such weapons against British and US soldiers was "100% guaranteed".
The 26-year-old soldier, who is an officer, defected 10 days ago near the city of Sulaymaniyah in Northern Iraq.
He is being guarded in a safe house and is said to have provided valuable intelligence information to authorities.
"A chemical attack is guaranteed," he warned.
"We have been fully provided with complete protection gear, gas masks, first aid kit, injections."
In the 1991 war, Saddam Hussein deployed his chemical weapons but they were not used.
Reports suggest he is planning to use pilotless drone planes to spray British and US troops with anthrax and sarin gas if they advance towards Baghdad.
"We are sure about the chemical bombardment," said the defector, whose identity is being protected.
"In the last stage, he will use it as a last resort."
The defector was part of Saddam's crack Republican Guard and has emphasised its role in ensuring the loyalty of other troops.
The privileged soldiers had their own bunkers for protection during air raids in the Gulf War.
"When it is time for war we are fully prepared to fight into the ground. If we don't fight hard, they will execute us," he said.
He said Baghdad was full of such loyal troops and special forces and the city would see heavy fighting.
"In Baghdad there will be a lot of killing," he added.
Video of the interview
TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: baghdad; chemicalweapons; invasion; iraq; mustard; mustardgas; oif; sarin; saringas; threat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-98 next last
To: maquiladora
This dovetails with the reports about the drone. I find it interesting that here we have a recent defector and he's allowed to give an interview to a U.K. news source. People surely want this info out right now. Maybe that drone is the so-called smoking gun that some people feel such a need to see before jumping on board.
2
posted on
03/10/2003 1:21:04 AM PST
by
Cap Huff
To: maquiladora
Bomb em till there is no one left to come after us
3
posted on
03/10/2003 1:21:33 AM PST
by
woofie
To: maquiladora
Rakis in Ragdad are going to get awful bored waiting for us to invade it.
We'll take out every palace first, then the ancient art of "siege" will begin.
Ragdad will implode.
4
posted on
03/10/2003 1:27:06 AM PST
by
Happy2BMe
(HOLLYWOOD:Ask not what U can do for your country, ask what U can do for Iraq!)
To: maquiladora
The "french fries" will say this is a staged video. Nothing will convince them, as they have too much to hide, too much we may find there, once we invade!
5
posted on
03/10/2003 2:01:39 AM PST
by
blondee123
(WAR: Saddams choice, not ours!)
To: Cap Huff
New news out on FOX is that the inspectors found a totally different missile type designed for chemwar.
It will be touted as a success for inspections, but th epress will forget that the fact it wan't reported in the first place means Iraq hasn't been cooperating. As if we don't know that already...
6
posted on
03/10/2003 2:14:23 AM PST
by
piasa
(Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
To: maquiladora
"I will say this once again, Iraq has NO Chemical, Biological or, Nuclear weapons." except the ones we are threatening to use.
7
posted on
03/10/2003 2:16:07 AM PST
by
OXENinFLA
To: piasa
About the news of new chem-war missiles, I'm sure you are right about how the press will try to play it. At this stage though the only audience that matters much are the UNSC members, particularly the swing voters. We're going in anyway. It only matters whether we have the PR cover of a UNSC resolution or whether we go in after a failed resolution or over a veto. Those seem to me to be the only three possibilities. The last is the optimum. Nine yes votes then a veto. We can call it a moral victory, and then let the U.N. get sunk by the veto.
The question I want an answer to is how the swing voters on the SC view this. Most ordinary people don't follow the news like most freepers.
8
posted on
03/10/2003 2:25:44 AM PST
by
Cap Huff
To: maquiladora
This CANNOT be true! The peaceniks and Hollyweirdos have told us and told us that there is nothing to go to war over in Iraq.
What's that you say? Chemical weapons are in contravention of UN resolutions? Well, posh, posh...we cannot be bothered by the facts. We're rather happy with our heads in the sand, really.
9
posted on
03/10/2003 2:33:14 AM PST
by
twntaipan
(Defend American Liberty: Defeat a demoncRAT!)
To: woofie
"Bomb em till there is no one left to come after us That's the plan. I'll bet there is a pretty good database of military or could be military targets that is updated frequently. I would not want to be in the neighborhood when an Iraqi chem weapons bunker is blown to bits (of course CNN will report this as a US chem weapons attack).
To: Sunnyvale CA Eng.
Wouldn't want to be in the neighborhood if God forbid any of our own chem weopons bunkers were blown up either.One hopes they are kept at high alert---there's one of those suckers thirty miles upwind.
11
posted on
03/10/2003 2:51:33 AM PST
by
IGNATIUS
To: All
I hope the defector's report is true, at least to the point of proving all the peaceniks and UN people wrong, but I wonder if he really did not defect and is just trying to scare us into not attacking Iraq. This would be similair to: "No we have no WMD, but you'll be sorry if you attack us!" I may be proven wrong, but I think that although Iraq does have WMD like chemicals, they do not have any effective way to make them a threat to our troops at this point in time. I guess I'll know eventually.
To: Cap Huff
>>Maybe that drone is the so-called smoking gun that some people feel such a need to see before jumping on board<<
No one who is not on board already gives a rat's a** about Iraq.
It's us they're against, and it doesn't matter at all what Iraq does or doesn't do.
Let's roll.
To: mark beoluke
I'm afraid to say that if our troops are attacked with chemical or bio weapons, the Hollyweirds and peaceniks will then resort to calling it "our fault" because we attacked Iraq.
The point that he said he didn't have any of these weapons will not even be on the radar screen for them.
These are the same folks that believe the reason the WTC fell was because of our misguided foreign policies.
14
posted on
03/10/2003 3:37:06 AM PST
by
dawn53
To: mark beoluke
"but I wonder if he really did not defect and is just trying to scare us into not attacking Iraq. "I also wondered about that angle. It just seems convenient for this to be happening now on the eve of us invading Iraq. The peace movement will be howling to the rooftops about our government knowingly sending our troops to certain death.
15
posted on
03/10/2003 3:42:36 AM PST
by
Kerberos
To: dawn53
Thanks for the reply. The best case scenario would be to capture alot of WMD material intact before any horrible use could be made of them. It may not impress the peaceniks, but I would hope at least the fence sitters would know we were right to attack Iraq.
To: maquiladora
could be a plant/disinformation .... send in an EMP bomb to neutralize all electronics... hussein can then carry buckets of anthrax and spread it around himself
To: mark beoluke
I realize that everyone on the Left considers this president to be a dunce. I guess they think he really would stake his reputation and presidency on a lie (i.e., Iraq has nuke, chem, and bio weapons). We'll know, alright....we'll know (once again) that the Left is wrong and that this president is right. But...not to worry....they'll never admit it.
To: maquiladora
"Saddam's crack Republican Guard"
Must they always say this just before they surrender?
Don't they actually have to do something "cracky" before they earn the title?
Ridiculous!
19
posted on
03/10/2003 3:54:07 AM PST
by
ALS
To: All
20
posted on
03/10/2003 3:54:22 AM PST
by
Cindy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-98 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson