[habs4ever]

Of course I get it.You, sir, have a very fevered imagination, and what makes you think that he is fending the US off? Because it hasn't happened yet? Unless you can prove to us that you have a direct pipeline into the NSC and WH, you know as litle as anyone else, so all your permutations and scenarios are as valid as the next guy's.Maybe if you understand the concept of deterrence, I will take your ideas seriously, but all you give us so far is your belief that Saddam has what you think he has.Is he Superman? There's is no equivalence in the threats between the US and Iraq.Nuclear war vs bioterrorism isn't a fair fight, ergo, it isn't a deterrent.

[GregoryFul]

You seem to under appreciate the bad consequences that would result from the US nuking Iraq, whether or not Saddam is capable of retaliating.

Recent US military policy has been to minimize US casualties. At high levels in US power structures, the preponderance of thinking regards safety of person as ultimate. They are ready to abandon (our) freedom, (our) constitutional rights, (our) treasure, other people's innocent lives, and their own dignity to preserve personal safety. I think that is the key to figuring out what the US response will be.

Before we proceed to do any serious damage to the perps, we will have to disarm the threat in this country. That could take some time.

[Clinton's a rapist]

I give up. You are as thick as a brick.