[Shermy]

"If Rumsfeld and the Pentagon planners are actually thinking of taking Baghdad in a MOUT style campaign, then expect casualties big-time. Even in the best training Marine units, we saw simulated casualties of no less than 25% of an invading force."

Perhaps the whole country will "surrender" or call themselves the equivalent of open cities. Perhaps Hussein-dependent elements will hole up in Tikrit, and that's where an urban battle may occur.

Just my guess.

[fogarty]

Perhaps. I was thinking they might avoid Baghdad altogether and just take the country's infrastructure and resources. Seige warfare has worked before, and could work again.

[xJones]

Sherm, here's a good opening to call me a nitwit (ouch! already) but why not smart-bomb to rubble every one of Saddam's palaces, all their communications centers, military installations, etc. and then see what happens? We're told that Saddam has deep hidey holes buried far underground. Unless he has alternate tunnel exits, the rubble might make escape difficult for he and his *friends*. Why the need for hand to hand street fighting, at least at first? If the Iraqi populace hates his dictatorship as much as we're told, millions of dropped leaflets afterwards, encouraging the Iraqi people with our peaceful intent toward THEM, might be very helpful to get them stirred up on their own.