[The Great Satan]

This complicates Saddam's thinking quite a bit. Would the United States really nuke Baghdad in the event of an anthrax attack on US cities? -- especially, say, if the attack caused only "intermediate-scale" casualties, say in the tens of thousands. Saddam might gamble that we are too soft and PC to strike back. But now he has to think about Sharon, too. Is he going to strike the US, but not Israel? I seriously doubt it: his whole personality cult is that he is the leader who will bring the Arabs victory over the Jews. But he knows we can absorb a few tens or hundreds of thousands dead: Israel can't. If he tries anything, Baghdad is a radioactive hole in the ground.

[Robert_Paulson2]

I think Israel is preparing to strike pre emptively.

I think we know it. I think our arab allies are jake with it privately...

Iraq is going to try and pull something... and Israel will retaliate BEFORE we get a resolution out of congress. Diplomacy, sanctions, negotiations and inspectors... this stuff does not work. The only time to come to the table is when one side is humiliated and defeated into submission... then talking works.

It is time for the humiliation part now.

[bonesmccoy]

Doesn't your psychological analysis of Hussein argue that Sharon's comments really are irrelevent in Bagdhad anyway? If Hussein is convinced he's going down anyway, he would rather martyr himself in a jihad against Jews.

I think the probability is better than 50/50 that Isreal will be hit with WMD (probably biological and chemical). For that reason, I am very concerned that Sharon's comments and any Israeli counter would potentially harm US forces in Iraq.

If that happens, it would damage US-Israeli relations for a long time.