I'm puzzled that people are shocked that the Iraqis did not use WMD. Think like an Iraqi commander in the field for a minute and you may reason it out:
The first days of the war were concentrated air power aimed at breaking the communications between Saddam and his army. No target to fire WMD at. Presumably, an egomaniac like Saddam would have to personally authorize the use of WMD. No comms = no authorization.
Now, if you're an Iraqi general and you see the Americans and British kicking the living bejeebees out of your troops, you know that the outcome is pretty well set. WMD may delay the end, but not prevent it. What do you do? If you unilaterally and without authorization use WMD, then when you are captured or surrender, you can pretty much assure yourself of warcrimes charges that will stick.
Since the UN has given Iraq the luxury of 12 years to build hiding places, I suspect that you leave most of the WMD where they are. The ones you have out, you ship to Syria or Iran.
The first days of the war were concentrated air power aimed at breaking the communications between Saddam and his army. No target to fire WMD at. Presumably, an egomaniac like Saddam would have to personally authorize the use of WMD. No comms = no authorization.
Now, if you're an Iraqi general and you see the Americans and British kicking the living bejeebees out of your troops, you know that the outcome is pretty well set. WMD may delay the end, but not prevent it. What do you do? If you unilaterally and without authorization use WMD, then when you are captured or surrender, you can pretty much assure yourself of warcrimes charges that will stick.
Since the UN has given Iraq the luxury of 12 years to build hiding places, I suspect that you leave most of the WMD where they are. The ones you have out, you ship to Syria or Iran.
Comment