[A-List] fog of war

[Bob Enoch <bobenoch@xxxxxxx>]

>From the beginning of this campaign, the Iraqi leadership has said "They can
come to Baghdad...."
US reports crow over the capture of bridges intact, but if Iraq wanted them
to "come to Baghdad" , this is no surprise.
The announcement of the "destruction" of two RG Divisions is unsupported by
evidence; where are the prisoners?
The photos of destroyed tanks?

These Divisions are more likely to have been withdrawn to the City, where
the Iraqis have said they intended to fight the invaders.Or they are sitting
in the rear of the 3rd ID and Marines in order to raid supply lines.

What is worrying, is that dubious reports of "panic", "headlong flight"
etc., combined with frenetic speculation in US media about WMD
might be intended to set up an attempt to release chemicals on the
battlefield, and pin this on a "desperate, last ditch
resistance" by the Iraqis.

On its face, the current portrayal of the situation doesn't add up
militarily;

The Iraqi strategy, in their own words, foresaw the arrival of "those
criminals" at the gates of Baghdad.The fact that they are arriving there now
could hardly be said to represent "impending collapse".
But "impending collapse" would provide the right context for the appearance
of chemical weapons on the battlefield.

Not a single town or city, save Umm Qasr, has been taken.
Nasiriya has survived for nine days...Basrah for 13...
What, in these circumstances, leads to an assumption that the Capital is
"ready to fall"?

Bob