Forum Lurker,

"...is it going to help that much if we bomb half of the city apart?"

I don't think that any city is going to be bombed to that extent - none were the last time.

"If he's that secure, how are we going to find him in an invasion?"

We actually need to find him?? My guess is that should this start, the result will be inevitable and he will probably be assassinated by members of the Ba'ath Party.

"The idea of a surgical strike is to hit specific targets, not necessarily the leaders themselves, with quick and overwhelming force."

In your post you mentioned doing this with "air-mobile troops" - considering the forces Saddam has in Baghdad, this air-mobile operation you propose would have to greater than Arnhem and the chance of success even then would be doubtful.

"Attacking the military command centers is just as, if not more, effective than the leadership itself."

That is what they did the last time - completely destroyed Iraq's air defence systems and their command and control centres - then defeat in detail whatever units actively oppose you. Apart from some fairly obvious concerns, Saddam also fears a coup by his army - he always has, that is why the Republican Guard were formed. He then thought that they too could turn, so the Special Republican Guard were formed. One of the results of this paranoia is that his army's means of fighting for any great length of time are strictly controlled, ammunition is held back - this makes his lines of supply extremely vulnerable once command of the air has been established.

"I don't know exactly how many people 4 brigades constitute,"

A Special Republican Guard Brigade consists of around 2,500 men, so 4 Brigades would be 10,000. As well as SPG units in Baghdad, there are also RG, FS and Regular Army and Air Force units.

"If Saddam's defence forces are as large and capable as you seem to imply, it would be much more effective to hit them quickly and precisely than to wear them down in a war of attrition."

Saddam's forces are large, but, compared to the forces they will be up against, are not as capable. "Desert Storm" was not fought as a war of attrition - neither will this one, should it happen. And I keep saying that because war is not inevitable - even at this juncture - All Saddam has to do is co-operate with the disarmament process and comply with UNSC Resolutions. He may do this, he may not - one of his main reasons for not complying is that without his weapons he cannot exercise the control over his civilian population that he requires to stay in power.