The Menagerie, Baghdad

HeXp£Øi±

Well-Known Member
Anyone catch Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institute on Charlie Rose last night? I strongly concur with his assesment of the situation in Iraq. He believes that Saddam will refrain from using chemical weapons with the hope that by the time the allied military reaches 'fortress Baghdad' there will be international outcry to call off the war since we probably won't have found any weapons of mass destruction by that time. Partially because much of his active chemical arsenal will have been pulled back to Baghdad with the republican & elete republican gaurd. Secondly, that Saddam has the fear that the allies will be able to withstand chemical weapons in the open but will be much less likely to take chances risking possibly thousands of casualties in an enclosed area such as Baghdad and that rather than fight we might choose to negotiate which would essentially be a victory for Saddam. Pollack believes as do i that if chemical weapons are used at any point, Baghdad is the most likely place we'll see them. Saddam has learned that he can't take us on head to head but he still believes that he'll be safe by making Baghdad into a fortress that the US and allies won't enter do to fear of taking casualties.
 
Just to inform some people, it looks like we'll be facing four and possibly five divisions of republican guard in Baghdad with 10,000 men per division and a total of about 800 tanks. A number which i previously was not clear on.
 
That doesn't sound too good, especially considering the defender has a strong advantage in the city!
 
Baghdad might very well be a wasteland when we get done with it. We could opt to surround the city and continue with precision strikes but that would only prolong the inevitable not to mention the suffering of civilians in that city.
 
Back
Top