Mr. Superbad

He doesn't have to anymore. He could just shoot tear gas, or even baby powder, at our troops they would have to wear their chem suits because we are so freaked out he'll use something deadly. It will have the same tactical effect.

...and besides, we all know he's hidden them in whatever Middle Eastern country the US wants to invade next.

theyeti

Dubya has hinted that he wouldn't be too shy to use nuclear weapons. Many in his administration are probably foaming at the mouth at the prospect. Saddam may be a muderous bastard, but that doesn't mean he wants his home or his troops to be nuked. I'm sure he'd rather have the war dragged out in messy conventional terms. Which makes me think of another possiblity:

7. He's hoping to make a fool of Bush by ridding himself of all WMD evidence.

Keep in mind that these are just possibilities. We all know the truth: He doesn't have any and the Bush administration has been lying.

theyeti

Dr Rick

Regardless of what one thinks about the war, it's hard to understand how he could not have such weapons. At the time the first group of inspectors left Iraq in 1998, he still had them, so believing that he doesn't any longer requires believing that he continued to dispose of them on his own without the inspection process in place.

Why would he have thwarted the inspectors only to go on and continue ridding himself of the WMDs?

Rick

Jane Bovary

There are many people convinced that the regime does have them, including this former weapons inspector Terence Taylor, who spent years in Iraq. The coalition has to work on the assumption that they do exist...obviously.

"Iraq had sufficient material to produce 8,500 litres of anthrax. And I know firsthand they have the capability to weaponise it and put it into artillery, put it into 122mm rockets and even the longer-range Al Hussein missiles of which they have a small number still, probably. There is no doubt the coalition has to be prepared for them being used. In my view, they have these weapons, they've weaponised them. They know how to use them. They've spent years working on them.

The most likely scenario in my personal view would be if the leadership begins to disintegrate and then perhaps local commanders take decisions on their own accord and maybe one or two of them may be motivated to use these weapons."

themistocles

Does anyone know the shelf life for most of the "feared" WMDs? I wonder how long one can store such things and what implication that has to this question or in general?

I well could be wrong, but I think using WMDs on the battlefield my bring a dangerous haste from the Allies and lose popular opinion (I'd think that Saddam is banking on a level of international support for the long term), whereas Iraq's only hope is to bog the Allies down. By dispatching WMDs, you ensure that the Allies will not "just sit around". I think the proclivity to avoid civilian damage is what ultimately will stall the Allies from invading Baghdad (hoping for an internal crumbling), WMDs would end that stance quickly.

Thor Q. Mada

Well, I would say, that the absence of proof is not the proof of absence.
But if it continues like it doesn now, till the end, then it should become a great embarrasment for the nations that have attacked Iraq on false pretexts, and then it is time to seriously start thinking about a war tribunal for the people involved. Let's not forget we are the unprovoked attackers this time. Not the good guys.

enrious

If Saddam were incapacitated and Iraq has WMD, it is possible that whomever is running the nation is not willing to use them, rhetoric aside.

Christ, people demanded more time for UN inspections (because 6 months wasn't enough) but won't give Coallition forces even 6 weeks...and those UN inspectors weren't getting shot at.

I guess you just can't please some people.

Ronin

You forget ~ we supposedly know that they have WMD...shouldn't be any problem at all going right to them.

Don't tell me we were just guessing after all this shit.

Zadok001

Saddam has lost the physical war - He never stood a chance. The war for public opinion, however, is very much an open matter. If he uses C/B weapons, he will lose that part of the fight. France has stated that such action would change their stance on the war instantly. Methinks that is not something Saddam wants.

enrious

And that means they know the exact GPS coordinates because the Iraqis are just friendly like that?

Or that they're not held in Baghdad?

Look, I don't know one way or another if Iraq has them, although I think it likely. However, if emperical evidence isn't presented after a reasonable amount of time (and I'm sorry, 2 fucking weeks during a war isn't a reasonable amount of time) then I would be the first in line to denounce that motivation.

Until then I'd rather withold my judgement in lieu of frothing at the mouth everytime someone starts a Bush jumping thread.