CENTCOM Briefing 4 FEB 91

File: doc71_04.txt
Page: 04
Total Pages: 8

Q: You gave us an indication of the number of bridges left in the northisouth aupply routes a
llttle earlier this week. Can YOU update that at all? It sounded like there were hardly any then. Ar~
there any now?
A: Any bridges le~t? As I z~collect my numbers. I don't have total, but I think we'd .Lnick
about 40 bridges both main and supporting bridges. It's not every bridge. obviously. in Iraq.
Tbose ones that~are the critical lines of communications tl~at lead into the Kuwait theater of
operations. We have targeted all of those. I don't have the numbers at my fingertips, but it was a
substantial number --27 out of 35 that were significant that have beel) damaged or destroyed. And
keep in mind, we continue to reservice those targets, ir we find that he's trying to repair and has
repair~d a critical bridge, that is a high priority target and we go back and strike it the next day or
ihe day after.

Q: Since this is the first time that one of the battleships has been in action in this particular
forum1 can you tell us what role they are playing in the general picture? What can they do that othe~
assets you have can't do?
A: I think it's importont to recogoize that we use all the weapon systems available. If we
have one that has a unique capability in the battleship with the 16 inch round that's 2,000 pounds
with the kind of accuracy we're talking about, when that system is in range, it can take on any
targets. It's a great weapon system. So the battleship will be employed based on its ability to bit
targets. I would say that's it. It's a great weapon system, and it will be employed along with all the
other systems we have0 and we'll use the best weapon systems to attack a given target.

Q: A French miutary spokesman says that allied air attacks on chemical installations have
released toxins into tbe atmosphere in Iraq. lie also says he thinks there's no danger from those
toxins. Do you share that view0 and on what grounds would you say there might be no danger?
A: I would say to that report that we have, in attacking those targets. attacked them in such
way, and I can't give you all the tec,hnical aspects of it, to minimize the potential for that, tor any
of those toxins to go into the air. It s not to say that it couldn't happen0 but certainly with a view
10 minimizing, if not eliminating, any possible contamination or the surrounding areas. It's been done
~ery carefully. I can't say that some may not be in the air and the immediate surroundings, but I
suspcct there would be no serio~s damage to any community.

Q: If you brought the battleship up and it's got a 25 mile range, that seems to Indicate that
it's fairly close to Kuwait or the northern end of the Cuif. Does that indicate that you tIlink you've
eJiminated all the Silkworm and Exocet possibilities tl~t would go against him?
A: We clearly would not put a battleship at unnecessa~ risk. i'm not saying a Silkworn~
can't do damage, but a battleship is a pretty healthy ship. It has reinforced steel anywhere ftom
2-112 to 17 inches1 and all of its vital areas are well protected. It's a pretty sturdy ship. I'm not
saying we're putting it in hartn's way, but clearly, our decision to put that weapon system where it
can fire and support the KT0 operations, we've done it with that in mind, that we are protecting
that system.

Q: `ihere's a Isritish pool report that says the British doctors are inoculating soldiers against
plague, that they Lhli& there may be something in chemical weapons that Iraq may use. Are there
specific diseases or ailments that the United States military personnel are being inoculated against, and
what would those be? Do you agree that the plague is one or them?
A: The plague doesn't ring a bell. We0ve heard allusions to anthrax and those kinds of
6~'~~nbes, but the ~rnp~rtant part of our procedures 1.1 the best pwtcction against anything -. be it