Hi Neocon; Re: "The major premise is that the US has not shown a propensity for using chemical and biological weapons, directly against troops, in any conflict of the last 50 years."
This is your opinion. It may not be shared by others. Funny that you only consider the last "50 years", the inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki remember farther. You are unable to deny the fact that the US is in possession of vast stores of WMDs. And there has been considerable speculation that those weapons would be used in a war, if needed.
In fact, here's some links you might consider from SI:
CobaltBlue, September 28, 2001
Ha'aretz reporting that Al Hayat reported that the US has deployed tac nukes to Afghanistan "as a last resort." #reply-16429038
Debka, October 7, 2001
Tactical Nuclear Weapons Deployed
Putin gave the nod for US forces poised in Central Asia to jump into Afghanistan to be armed with tactical nuclear weapons, such as small neutron bombs, which emit strong radiation, nuclear mines, shells, and other nuclear ammunition suited to commando warfare in mountainous terrain. In return, Bush assented to Russia deploying tactical nuclear weapons units around Chechnya after Moscow’s ultimatum to the rebels, some of whom are backed by Osama Bin Laden, to surrender, went by without response. #reply-16466720
Stanley Kurtz, March 3, 2003
...
Alternatively, we could accompany a raid on the North's nuclear processing facilities with tactical nuclear strikes against underground troop and artillery emplacements.
... #reply-18650173
William Arkin, LA Times, January 25, 2003
The Nuclear Option in Iraq
...
According to multiple sources close to the process, the current planning focuses on two possible roles for nuclear weapons: attacking Iraqi facilities located so deep underground that they might be impervious to conventional explosives; thwarting Iraq's use of weapons of mass destruction.
... #reply-18492357
While I believe that all the above (and the many, many, many other examples, including threats by US officials) were bullshit, they do provide evidence that the Iraqis would not have assumed that they would not be nuked. It's well known that Iraqis are not particularly well grounded in reality. For you to argue otherwise is kind of quaint.
-- Carl |
