Useful Fools

Among a number of mysteries from the Battle of Iraq is the question: Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Let us assume that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction. In that case, one would expect him to have been far more forthcoming with weapons inspectors, even inviting them in years ago, in order to have the sanctions lifted. The sanctions were a huge cost to the economy.

The fact that Saddam took no measures to remove the sanctions strongly suggests that he had WMDs. In that case, one might ask why the UN inspectors didn’t find them. That is not a mystery - the surprising event would have been for UN inspectors to find a WMD!

But we do end up with another problem. If the WMD’s are in Iraq, why isn’t the US panicking… employing maximum effort to prevent terrorists from getting the WMD’s? After all, the primary point of this exercise was to keep WMDs out of terrorist hands, and if WMDs are just laying around Iraq, or even are buried not too deep, terrorists might snatch them.

One answer may be that we are exerting maximum effort, and hiding the panic. This is unlikely given the large number of journalists in the area and the propensity of folks to leak information.

Another may be that we actually know where the WMDs are and those areas are protected. That makes the strong assumption that our intelligence is very good - which seems quite dangerous.

It might be that we know, from Iraqi sources, that all of the weapons have been destroyed. The early detection of cyanide and mustard agent in the river hints that some were dumped. If we believe all have been destroyed or disposed of, our teams would be going around looking for traces and precursers rather than the chemical or biological weapons. It seems dangerous to assume that we know the fate of all WMDs.

Add to this the strong and frequently stated assertion by various administration personnel that we *will* find WMDs. They seem very sure, and their reputations would certainly suffer if they are wrong.

So what the heck is going on?

My best guess is that we have found some WMDs - specifically chemical weapons - but are keeping it quiet until we find all of them. This is to prevent any remaining regime loyalists from using WMDs, and also to cause former members of the regime with WMD knowledge to be willing to surrender, thinking they have valuable information (and some will).

The greatest mass of WMDs would be chemical. For chemical weapons to be effective on the battlefield, thousands of tons are needed.
There probably aren’t any nuclear WMDs other than the components to make radiological dispersal devices (”dirty bombs”) which are indistinguishable from rad waste.

There may or may not be biological weapons. If there were, they were probably destroyed by Iraqis during the war. Anthrax would require hundreds to thousands of kilograms, and yet is a poor battlefield agent. Smallpox would be hard to spread, doesn’t store well, and is an even worse battlefield agent.

On the other hand, useful quantities (for terrorism or seedstock) of some of the agents (smallpox, botulin toxin) can be transported in very small containers. It is possible that they were carried out of the country during the war - perhaps by “Dr. Germ” - and are for sale in another country, or were traded to Syria for refuge.