"Shrine stand-off in Najaf" - why can't they use tear gas and get it over?

[cthrumatrix]

This daily update on the US forces moving within 40 yards ...then back..then forward...and can't damage the structure is looking like a "keep the war and drama going story"

Why can't they use tear gas...capture the Sadr army and get it over with? I don't see the Sadr army with gas masks.

My tinfoil hat says that this whole thing is "played out" to keep the "drama" going ...that can be used for a distraction when needed.


Am I way off base here ?

[Frodo]

1. It's a pretty large building

And the people inside are better equipped than a pair of rednecks with sharpened nail clippers.

[cthrumatrix]

3. I would think our technology could address that...with no harm to

individuals.

[Frodo]

4. Didn't work particularly well at Waco.

And they didn't have mortars or anti-tank rounds.

[DUreader]

2. Geneva Conventions have never stopped them before

I don't know why not

It may not be geneva but use of any kind of gas has been deemed a

mistake since ww1, the reason given that enemies have no way of knowing

with what they have been gassed and may just retaliate with worse before

even trying to find out.

[ET Awful]

5. Geneva does prohibit the use of any chemical weapons

Basically, you can use it domestically against your own people, but not against the enemy.

[Jacobin]

6. What makes anyone think that this would "get (anything) over"

An article posted here yesterday that I cannot now find describes the chaos in the chain of command of occupation forces. No one is in charge. No one wants to take the blame for what will happen if it works or does not work. Local commanders are making decisions willy-nilly, one day pressing, the next day pulling back.

The entire occupation is a clusterfuck and cannot work.

IraqNam is a sick sick sick maelstrom of greed, incompetence, hubris, stupidity as only could have been implemented by DimSon himself.