The U.S.-led forces invaded Iraq; but no weapons of mass destruction were found

WASHINGTON, April 10 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) - The U.S. administration had feared burning oil wells, chemical weapon attacks and a military quagmire but the statue of Saddam Hussein fell in central Baghdad without the “nightmare scenarios” coming true.

U.S. leaders have warned that the war is not yet over but it was the same White House and Defense Department officials and experts that had predicted the worst before the conflict started March 20.

There could be new September 11 terror attacks on the United States, thousands of health workers and military were vaccinated against smallpox, retired generals warned that Iraq could become a new Vietnam.

But after just three weeks of war, the U.S. army now controls most of Baghdad and the battle for the city has moved forward without the degree of vicious street-to-street fighting feared by American military commanders, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported on Thursday, April 10.

Saddam's Republican Guard and the Fedayeen paramilitary militia headed by the president's son Uday, have not proved the fanatical fighting force their reputation had suggested.

Colonel Mike Turner, who was an aide to General Norman Schwartzkopf, the U.S. military commander, during the 1990-1991 Gulf War, told of his nightmare during a debate on National Public Radio.

"Within hours of our attack, Saddam launches Scuds on Israel. Israel's right-wing government launches a full-scale attack on Iraq, creating a holy war nightmare."

But U.S. troops quickly took control of western Iraq and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the progress toward Baghdad over the past three weeks had been "spectacular".

Absent Weapons

Equally absent have been apocalyptic scenarios of attacks using biological, chemical or nuclear weapons.

Washington said, Wednesday, April 9, that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq had failed to uncover weapons of mass destruction in the country.

In justifying the need for military action against Iraq, the United States and its staunch ally Britain had alleged that Iraq possessed large quantities of chemical gas and biological agents such as anthrax and was working to develop nuclear weapons.

A few days before the war, chief U.N. weapons inspectors underlined there was no evidence of banned activities in Iraq and lauded Baghdad ’s "acceleration of activities" since the end of January as a positive development.

But U.S. President George W. Bush said on the eve of the start of the war three weeks ago, at a summit in the Azores with British Prime Minister Tony Blair: "The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations."

Blair, for his part, told Britain's House of Commons: "If the only means of achieving the disarmament of Iraq of weapons of mass destruction is the removal of the regime, then the removal of the regime has to be our objective."

The Wall Street Journal, whose editorials have consistently backed military intervention in Iraq, warned Tuesday: "If the United States does not make any undisputed discoveries of forbidden weapons, the failure will feed already widespread skepticism abroad about its motives for going to war."

Rumsfeld, asked Wednesday about the level of concern within the Bush administration over the existence of WMD in Iraq, replied: "You bet we're concerned about it."

"The nexus between terrorist states with weapons of mass destruction, in this case chemical and biological and nuclear technologies and knowledge, and terrorists groups, networks, is a critical link," he said.

In December, the German daily Tageszeitung published a list of companies and institutions named by Baghdad's December 7 report to the United Nations on its weapons systems including U.S. firms that provided nuclear, biological or chemical components.

The Bush administration was peppered with questions about why the self-declared “allied forces” in Iraq have not found any of the chemical or biological weapons that represented Bush's central justification for forcibly disarming Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's government.

Oil Fears Down

Speaking in early March, Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies raised the specter of Iraqis blowing up their own oil wells, provoking an ecological disaster in tandem with an escalation of the price of oil to severe economic repercussions all around the globe.

The White House had noted back on March 28 that oil prices had even fallen during the conflict after the fears failed to materialize.

The possibility of a major humanitarian crisis has also been sidestepped, despite civilian casualties in Iraq.

Even though thousands of people have headed towards Jordan and Iran to avoid U.S. and allied bombings, the figures are well below the hundreds of thousands -- or even millions -- envisaged.

Another potential "catastrophe" for the Bush administration also seems for the moment to have been avoided. The U.S. public have not turned their backs on him, with polls reporting more than three Americans in four still support him.