WASHINGTON, Feb 23 (Reuters) - U.S. officials are trying to assess how Iraq would use chemical and biological weapons in the case of war, with experts saying targeting civilians in a nearby state may be deadlier than attacking invading troops.

Iraq denies possessing such weapons, and U.N. weapons inspectors have come up empty-handed in their search for them.

But U.S. defense and intelligence officials and independent experts say they are confident Iraq not only has a hidden stockpile of chemical and biological agents but numerous ways to deliver them to their target.

Amy Smithson, a leading expert on chemical and biological weapons proliferation, said there could be no doubt Saddam Hussein maintains an extensive arsenal. But she noted that even with a large chemical and biological arms stockpile in 1991, the Iraqi president elected not to use them in the Gulf War.

Smithson said Saddam might be more inclined to use them in a war meant not to eject his troops from a neighboring state, as in 1991, but to topple him from power and disarm Iraq.

...
Biological warfare agents include bacteria and viruses, as well as certain toxins. Iraq is thought to have anthrax, smallpox, ricin, botulinum and perhaps other agents in weaponized form, analysts said.

Chemical weapons are deadly poisons. Analysts said Iraq is believed to have VX and sarin nerve gas, mustard gas, phosgene, chlorine and cyanide. Saddam used chemical agents against Iran in the 1980-88 war and against Iraqi Kurds in 1987-88.

John Pike, director of the GlobalSecurity.org think tank, said Iraq likely has a stockpile of hundreds of tons of chemical and biological agents. To put that in perspective, North Korea is widely estimated to have a stockpile of thousands of tons, and the United States had 31,000 tons and the Soviets declared 40,000 tons at their respective peaks.
...
Could a single Scud warhead spew forth so much poison gas or deadly germs into Tel Aviv that it would kill thousands of Israeli citizens, placing Sharon under irresistible pressure to retaliate 50-fold? I think that's something you'd have to worry about," Pike said.

Goure questioned whether the Iraqi military would be able to use chemical or biological weapons effectively against invading troops. He said a direct hit on U.S. or British forces could produce deaths numbering "anywhere from a hundred to several thousand -- probably not higher," partly because troops in the field are relatively scattered and moving quickly.

Goure said several factors could prevent such an attack from being effective.

» Reuters AlertNet - US mulls how Iraq may use chemical-biological arms