SADDAM'S PLAN FOR DIRTY WAR

New York Post ^ | 3/11/03 | NILES LATHEM

[kattracks]

WASHINGTON - New evidence surfaced yesterday proving Saddam Hussein is planning a take-no-prisoners dirty war that will include using chemical weapons against U.S. troops and burning his oil wells.

A defector from Saddam's Republican Guard said yesterday that elite units have been vaccinated and provided with gas masks and other equipment because it is "100 percent guaranteed" that Saddam will turn his chemical arsenal on American invaders.

[goldstategop]

When it comes to war Saddam is not a knight playing by the rules of chivalry. He lives by the take no prisoners gangsta code of The Godfather.

[noutopia]

Say it aint so Saddam say it aint so.

[monocle]

Another element of Saddam's vicious strategy includes sending his men on the streets wearing American and British military uniforms, which he has already purchased, to commit atrocities against civilians.

If what I have read is true, this plan is a means for uncovering those who oppose Saddam and support liberation.

[Russell Scott]

I hope Saddam seeks UN approval before attempting any of this. Otherwise, it might be deemed illegal by Kofi "can't we all just get along" Annan.

[goldstategop]

Yeah and I hope he checks with Jacques first before doing anything to embarrass his French sidekick.

[Cacophonous]

When it comes to war Saddam is not a knight playing by the rules of chivalry. He lives by the take no prisoners gangsta code of The Godfather.

You are complaining about chivalry from a man whose country is about to be invaded?

It is very easy to call for chivalry when you are holding the bigger sword. In the olden days, they wouldn't consider it a fair fight if both sides were not equally armed. It would be unchivalrous.

Iraq's weapons production capabilities have been stifled; they know they are going to be invaded. Of course he's going to throw the kitchen sink at his invaders. I would hope the US would too, if the situation were reversed.

Of course, noone is calling for the US to give him a break.

Just don't pretend to be shocked at what he resorts to. Many (including me) warned that he would do this; he has nothing to lose. If the War Party is just now seeing this, they are either incredibly stupid or lying.

[BullDog108]

Of course, noone is calling for the US to give him a break.

Except you, perhaps?

[Cacophonous]

Except you, perhaps?

Now BullDog. I invite you to read everything I've ever written and see if I have ever implied support for anyone other than the US, and if my support was ever less than 100%.

I don't give a damn about Iraq, it's leader, it's people. Ditto that for the entire Middle East. And Europe. And Asia, Africa, South and Central America...you get the idea. A war of liberation is an awful reason to go to war; as I said, I don't care about them.

My only concern is for the US, and for her soldiers.

We have been planning to invade since the President named the Axis of Evil 15 months ago. While I thought at the time it was hyperbolic rhetoric, if he had followed the speech with immediate (say, within a week) action, I would have been impressed.

It was never a question of "if". President Bush went the appease-the-UN route (which true Conservatives are not supposed to do), using those sham investigators, giving Saddam time (15 months and counting) to prepare his defenses. But we were going to invade no matter what the inspectors found or did not find, no matter what Saddam disclosed or not, no matter what he destroyed or not.

I knew it, you knew it, Saddam knew it. It was not a question of "if". We put him in a position where he has nothing to lose.

Obviuosly Saddam does not have the conventional forces to meet the 250K US troops over there, so he's going to, as I said, throw the sink at his invaders. Including, I predicted, launching bio- and chem-Scuds at American invaders and/or Israel.

This should surpise noone. It is desperate, yes, and unpleasant, certainly. But the war planners should have seen it coming; perhaps they did (I see the 2nd ACR getting their NBC gear in order before deploying), and it's only starry-eyed idiots that did not. If noone saw it coming, then are they the ones we want leading us in war.

To bring this full circle, I fear the useless loss of American soldiers, a loss that could have been avoided by not appeasing the UN.

And I objecting to the use of the term "chivalry". Desperation is rarely chivalrous.

[BullDog108]

I believe you. It is just that from my side of the keyboard it sounded as though you were rationalizing/justifying Saddam's behavior.

FWIW, I believe that the invasion will happen exactly when all of our ducks are in a row. Not an hour sooner, nor an hour later. It will not have anything to do with lunar cycles, UN resolutions or public perception.

[Maceman]

He lives by the take no prisoners gangsta code of The Godfather.

They had a code in The Godfather -- they would never kill someone's wife or children to send a message.

[Cacophonous]

Thank you. I apologize if I sounded a little defensive; I am just getting tired of being accused of being anti-American when I raise concerns about our soldiers' safety.

[Hatteras]

"FWIW, I believe that the invasion will happen exactly when all of our ducks are in a row. Not an hour sooner, nor an hour later. It will not have anything to do with lunar cycles, UN resolutions or public perception."

With all due respect, what other ducks are there? The military forces have let the White House know they are ready. Pushing back any time tables for the sake of "inspections" is a "no win" situation. Although I still have confidence that GWB has an endgame, there are times when that confidence begins to wane.

[BullDog108]

And I apologise for being facetious.

[BullDog108]

With all due respect, what other ducks are there?

The Northern Front?

[Consort]

Don't you think that the majority of the Iraqi military will run and/or surrender just like they did last time? We can have the Kurds and the Iraqi Opposition do the street fighting. They have a score to settle with Saddam. Saddam will likely want to live and will go into exile. He can have safe haven in Algeria or Libya or Cuba if he doesn't screw it up by using banned weapons.

In the meantime, the UN and the Democrats are getting more and more anti-American and it will be held against them by most Americans.

[Cacophonous]

Don't you think that the majority of the Iraqi military will run and/or surrender just like they did last time?

Probably. Apparently some already are. But there are those that won't, and with chems spread by a UAV, who knows what the casualties will be?

And in the long term, I'm not sure, once Saddam is out, and if the US does not keep its word and leave immediately, I think the resentment against the US will only grow.

The Arabs are a funny bunch. In North Africa, in WWII, they cheered the Americans liberating them from the French because they thought the Americans were the Germans.

I hope we do what we say, and DO NOT establish a long-term presence.

[Kenton]

Dear Iraquis: To paraphrase Tina Turner, we can do this easy, or we can do it rough. It makes less difference to us in the long run than it will to you.

Using chemicals and biological agents will do nothing except guarantee that you will receive no quarter.

[AngryGuy]

During the american revolution, Americans used "duck and cover" techniques to fight the British while they marched in "proper" formation. In a war, all bets are off- there is a winner and a loser. "It's all fair in love and war".
If saddam wants to get dirty, then I suggest we bring it to him full force and play by his own rules.