By Sally buzbee, Associated Press, 03/25/03

| Complete coverage |  RELATED INFORMATION Obituaries of Hussein brothers Hussein brothers' bodies List of Iraq's most wanted  TODAY'S GLOBE [ Globe stories from past week ]  PHOTO GALLERIES The aftermath of war Baghdad after Saddam Iraq photo journal Iraq's National Museum looted The liberation of Baghdad Saddam's statue is toppled The taking of Basra With the Army V Corps More photo galleries from Iraq  MESSAGE BOARDS Readers react to the war on Iraq  VIEWS ON WAR Latest from the Globe opinion pages A look at the antiwar movement  GRAPHICS Interactive map of Iraq Comparison of US, Iraqi forces Learn about coalition weaponry More maps and graphics  TEXT Speeches, reports, documents

WASHINGTON -- Several American prewar assumptions -- or at least hopes -- have proved wrong in the war's early days. Some examples: Masses of Iraqi soldiers rushing to surrender. Saddam's top people defecting at the first signs of trouble. And Turkish leaders willing to give America all it wanted.

The overall result has been more uncertainty and risk as the battle for Baghdad nears.

"I'm not sure ... we gave full credence to the fact that you would have a bunch of bandits riding around in civilian clothes, just wreaking havoc," Pat Roberts, a Republican who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Tuesday of guerrilla fighters resisting U.S. troops.

Warfare simply can't be predicted, no matter how much Pentagon planners try, Roberts and others say.

Some of the wrong assumptions have ended in good news: So far, the Iraqi government has not launched chemical attacks on U.S. troops or Israel. And there have been no widespread oilfield fires or destroyed dams, as many planners feared.

Much of what American planners expected is coming true: The fight to control Baghdad is shaping up to be key, as many long believed.

Yet less than two weeks ago, Vice President Dick Cheney said the Bush administration believed Iraqis would "welcome as liberators the United States." Iraqis have not rushed to cheer arriving troops, either because they remain fearful who will win, or simply because they do not welcome U.S. troops.

On Thursday, after the war's first strikes, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he still strongly hoped Saddam's top aides would defect to avoid "the full force and fury of a war." On Tuesday, Rumsfeld said: "We have said repeatedly we can't say how long it will last."

Some assumptions that have not come true:

-- Regular Iraqi army soldiers would surrender en masse at the first opportunity, creating momentum for the U.S. invasion. Instead, only a few thousand troops have done so.

Saddam's government was able to put loyal guerrilla fighters, called the Fedayeen, among its regular troops, intimidating them into not surrendering, U.S. officials suggest. That has resulted in resistance throughout the country, and American casualties.

-- Key aides would turn on Saddam after a bombing campaign designed to make a U.S. takeover seem inevitable.

Saddam's grip on the country appeared shaky the first few days of the war, U.S. officials said. But in recent days, he and other top officials have appeared on TV attempting with some success to appear in control and thus rally Iraq's people and soldiers.

-- Iraqi citizens would pour into the streets cheering and jubilant as they greeted arriving U.S. soldiers. Officials said Tuesday that a popular uprising against Saddam's government appeared under way in the southern city of Basra, the only sign so far of Iraqi revolt against Saddam's regime.

-- Opening a northern front would help disperse the Republican Guard, the defenders of Baghdad. But Turkey refused to allow the United States to use Turkish bases to get troops to Iraq, forcing the Pentagon to scuttle the plans. So far, the United States has not moved large numbers of troops into the north.

"We assumed it would be a two-front war," said Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute in Washington. "It's turned out to be a one-front war, and that makes our movements more predictable and the resistance more unified."

-- The Iraqis would set fires to sabotage large numbers of oil wells. Instead, only a few were set on fire, and U.S. officials were able to prevent sabotage of some others.

-- The Iraqis would use chemical weapons against U.S. troops, or attempt to launch Scud missiles, perhaps with chemical weapons, at a country like Israel. That has not happened. And U.S. troops have not yet found any chemical or biological weapons, nor Scuds, that officials contend Saddam possesses.

Yet many Pentagon officials fear the Iraqis might still use chemical weapons against U.S. troops fighting the Republican Guard outside Baghdad.

"There's always going to be unknowns," said James Carafano, a retired Army officer now a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington.

"The smart thing to do is, if one of your assumptions proves false, make sure you still have enough forces to be successful," Carafano said. "And it looks like they have."