Rattle wrote:
] Does Saddam move first?
]
] I'm going with yes, with a spread of 12 hours.. That is, at
] least 12 hours before whatever deadline is set gets reached..

I completely agree with you. I said that this morning and I was met with skepticism. But I really do believe he will.

Extra points if Saddam somehow bombs the White House while Bush is giving his "this is why we're going to war, kiddies" speech.

Rattle wrote:
] Does Saddam move first?
]
] I'm going with yes, with a spread of 12 hours.. That is, at
] least 12 hours before whatever deadline is set gets reached..

Shit...I hadn't really thought about that. Damn.

Rattle wrote:
] Does Saddam move first?
]
] I'm going with yes, with a spread of 12 hours.. That is, at
] least 12 hours before whatever deadline is set gets reached..

My guess is no... In fact, I'm surprised that his troops haven't fired on us over the last few months. Over the last decade, there'd been a kind of constant low-grade conflict, as U.S. or British planes would take out targets in the No-Fly Zone, and Iraqis would shoot back, but over the last couple months, things have been surprisingly quiet from the Iraqi side. My guess is that Saddam knew that if his troops *did* fire first, that it would give us the (relatively) moral high ground to move in and say that we were just "advancing in self defense".

The thing that I'm most curious about, is whether there will be some other move by a higher-up in the Iraqi military. After all, if they're genuinely worried about an attack by the U.S., the entire invasion could probably be stopped by one single bullet -- fired at Saddam.

Elonka wrote:
] Rattle wrote:
] ] Does Saddam move first?
] ]
] ] I'm going with yes, with a spread of 12 hours.. That is, at
] ] least 12 hours before whatever deadline is set gets
] reached..
]
] My guess is no... In fact, I'm surprised that his troops
] haven't fired on us over the last few months. Over the last
] decade, there'd been a kind of constant low-grade conflict, as
] U.S. or British planes would take out targets in the No-Fly
] Zone, and Iraqis would shoot back, but over the last couple
] months, things have been surprisingly quiet from the Iraqi
] side. My guess is that Saddam knew that if his troops *did*
] fire first, that it would give us the (relatively) moral high
] ground to move in and say that we were just "advancing in self
] defense".

Personally, I think that we'll have Baghdad surrounded inside of a week. Then things get very complicated and very messy. Urban combat is still very difficult. There's also been rumours of a vast underground subway system in Baghdad that's never been used by the public. So who knows. But I doubt that we'll have much trouble controlling the country as a whole. The whole plan is to isolate Hussein from command and control and basically surround him. Something we should've done 12 years ago.

] The thing that I'm most curious about, is whether there will
] be some other move by a higher-up in the Iraqi military.
] After all, if they're genuinely worried about an attack by the
] U.S., the entire invasion could probably be stopped by one
] single bullet -- fired at Saddam.

A great point and one that would make everything a lot better. I don't think anyone can argue that this isn't the most desired solution. One has to wonder why it's not already happened.

Rattle wrote:
] Does Saddam move first?
]
] I'm going with yes, with a spread of 12 hours.. That is, at
] least 12 hours before whatever deadline is set gets reached..

Move first? What's he gonna do? I saddam has any sort of tactical mind he'll give up on the standard war tactics, because we can crush a regular military. If he expects to be successfull in keeping his country, he needs to wage a guerilla war.
My bet is, that when our troops go into dense populated areas, they will be met with suicide bombers, hit and run tactics, and the like.
Casualtys are likely to be high, and public support for the war will quickly drop.
Thats my guess.