Therein lies the issue. I never stated that I did not believe he would use them or that the U.S. government does not believe that he would use them. I simply listed the possibility that once the war started, he or his generals may have changed their minds regarding the use of WMD during the war--of course he could have been killed during the initial strike too and so his generals may have then made that decision. During the war, it became quite clear that the majority of his support from the Arab world was due to the fact that other Arab countries believed that Iraq does NOT have WMD and that would make the U.S. a conquerer, not a liberator. It is possible that in order to maintain the support from the Arab world (it is in his best interests to do that) that he decided not to use them at that time. That does not mean he would never use them against the U.S. or sell them to terrorists-afterall U.S. intelligence points out that indeed he would.


>Tracy
>
>If France has nukes, but people believe France will not use them unless attacked, France is therefore not regarded as a "threat to the world" just because it has nukes it might use.
>
>Consider what you are saying re SH not wanting to use WMD, for whatever reason, and restate the above:
>
>"If SH has WMD, but people believe he will not use them even when attacked by people who openly state their intention to undo him..."
>
>
>
>Regards
>
>JR