Replies

Smallpox is not likely in Saddam's doomsday toolkit -- if it was, we most likely would have heard about it after Hussein Kamil's defection in 1995. Saddam's CBW program is based on three major agents:

Anthrax
Botulinum toxin
VX gas

Certainly, it is a good thing that we will shortly have stocks on hand to innoculate the whole population against smallpox, if necessary. After all, you never know. But even if Saddam had smallpox, it would make a poor vengeance weapon. First, most of the victims would eventually be in the Third World, which won't have vaccine. Secondly, simulations of such attacks indicate that, even in the event of mass dispersals, the final death toll in the United States would not likely exceed the hundreds, because of the slowness with which the disease spreads and the ease of containment. Note that the much-publicized, worst-case "Dark Winter" Scenario, which foresees a million dead, is based on an attack without vaccine on hand. Thirdly, smallpox does not destroy property or involve an area-denial effect.

In contrast, the key component of Saddam's WMD arsenal, anthrax, is capable of producing far higher casualties and almost unimaginable economic damage. A recent Rand study predicted up to 3 million dead from a large-scale anthrax dispersal in California -- far higher than the death toll from any conceivable hand-delivered smallpox, nuke or dirty bomb-type attack. A 1993 Congressional Office of Technology Assessment study predicted a death toll of up to 3 million from an anthrax attack on Washington, DC. It was this study that Sec. Def. William Cohen famously referenced in his "bag of sugar" demonstration. Recall, to, that any city which depends heavily on a subway for its economic livelihood can be basically written-off if Saddam's sleepers release the "Daschle" type aerosolizable anthrax in the subway system. Decontamination would take years, so a city like New York would become essentially waste ground after such an attack, never mind the initial casualties. Recall, too, that 4 million people use the NYC subway every day. In the event of a large scale anthrax release on that subway -- say an al-Qaeda martyrdom operative tossing the contents of a breifcase onto the tracks the night before rush hour -- not only could you expect a large fraction of these people to die but, given the extremely time-critical nature of any treatment, a complete collapse of the civil order would be inevitable.

After he destroyed the World Trade Center last year, Saddam put Bush on notice as to what the final consequence of any showdown would be, sending the US political leadership a sample of the most highly-weaponized anthrax ever produced, along with a warning:

If you have been wondering why the buildup for the campaign against Iraq has been so leisurely, or why the US government has been stalling the public over the source and meaning of the anthrax letters for a year, wonder no more. Engage your noggin, and think it through. For the time being, at least, we are truly f***ed. The advantage in war is always with the aggressor, because he has worked out his moves beforehand. It will take the rest of Bush's term before we can hope to get ourselves out of this pickle.