Fears Mount Over Use of Chemical Arms : Military: Concern is highest among thousands of allied troops near borders with Iraq and Kuwait.

Iraqi offensives across the Kuwait border are elevating fears that Saddam Hussein will soon unleash the most-feared element of his arsenal--chemical weapons.

On Thursday, British Defense Minister Tom King warned that Iraq is likely to employ chemical weapons and Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the allied commander, said that he will not be surprised if Hussein uses chemical agents.

These fears are part of daily life for those at most serious risk, the thousands of troops hunkered down in the sand on the 200-mile front along the Saudi-Kuwaiti border.

“He (Hussein) is a desperate man and could use anything he’s got now,” said Cpl. Frederick Spicer, 22, a member of the Army’s 82d Airborne Division, which is entrenched within sight of Iraqi positions and within reach of Iraqi artillery.

“The soldiers have a real anticipation of getting gassed,” said Staff Sgt. Robert Langston, 28, an Army medic with the unit.

“This is not fun and games,” said Spec. Alan Mayo, 20, of San Diego. “You’ve got to keep your wits about you and your gas mask at your side.”

Iraq has not hesitated to use chemical weapons in the past. In a CNN interview this week, Hussein refused to rule out their use. And while questions have been raised about its ability to arm its missiles with chemical warheads, Iraq has proven that it can deliver poison gas by artillery and aircraft.

The U.N. Security Council documented many instances in which Iraq used chemical weapons against enemy troops in the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s. There also have been reports that Iraq used poison gas on its own Kurdish population to quell dissent.

By the end of its eight-year conflict with Iran in 1988, Iraq was able to integrate chemical weapons into a combined offensive of the sort that could be launched across the Kuwaiti border here.

The Iraqis used both aircraft and artillery to spread nerve gas and immobilizing blister agents among Iranian troops. But in this conflict, artillery poses the greater threat to coalition troops.

U.S. commanders assert that they control the skies, denying Hussein the opportunity to deliver bombs in significant numbers on the front. But it is widely believed here that Iraq still has the use of much of its potent array of self-propelled and towed artillery.

Moreover, the menace of Iraq’s artillery may be multiplied by the fact that, at least on paper, it is superior to the American artillery systems, according to experts.

“When it comes to range and accuracy, Iraq’s 155-millimeter howitzer will outperform anything the U.S. Army possesses,” said Christopher Foss, editor of Jane’s Armour and Artillery, a British publication that reviews the world’s weapons systems. “It will give our boys bloody hell on the battlefield.”

Before the Gulf War started, Iraq had 300 such howitzers, obtained from Austria and South Africa, according to Forecast International, a defense think tank in Newton, Conn. These guns have a range of 25 miles, 25% greater than the U.S. Army’s best artillery. And they are also regarded as more accurate, experts say.

In addition, Iraq entered the war with about 3,000 artillery pieces having a slightly shorter range but one that still exceeds U.S. capabilities. Some of these are self-propelled, boosting their chances of escaping return fire from U.S. artillery and aircraft.

American commanders have not discussed how many Iraqi artillery pieces have been destroyed in more than two weeks of almost nonstop bombing. But U.S. artillerymen believe that the allies nevertheless have an edge.

Gunners with the Army’s 1st Cavalry Division said that they have greater mobility and are better able to locate targets than the Iraqis and that they can react faster and withdraw from range easier.

Allied air superiority should make it easier to launch counterattacks against Iraqi artillery positions and coordinate the fire of U.S. artillery.

Still, artillerymen are well aware of the threat posed by Iraq. The gunners dig the deepest bunkers--holes up to the armpits of the tallest man, then three layers of sandbags and a plywood roof supported by timbers, all topped with another foot-and-a-half of sandbags.

These bunkers will survive anything short of a direct artillery hit. But they offer no protection from nerve gas and other chemical agents in Iraq’s arsenal.

The dangers posed by chemical weapons have placed added demands on the medical units accompanying the 1st Cavalry’s artillery. They have been working in full chemical-protection gear, which is cumbersome and physically exhausting. Soldiers, too, have the suits. Still, there are fears.

“The protective gear is good,” said Doc Winkler, a medic with the unit. “But what happens if you have to treat a shattered leg? The chemical agents will quickly enter the bloodstream.”

The cold desert nights and dusty days are broken often by the banshee howls of sirens that warn troops of incoming artillery and the ever-present danger that the shells could contain gas.

An 82d Airborne camp went on alert three times Monday. After each one, a soldier was chosen by rank to take off his gas mask first. He was the guinea pig to detect the presence of gas.

“It did make me kind of nervous, but I was praying it was a false warning,” said a sergeant from Ft. Devens, Mass., who served as guinea pig after one alert. “I was thinking about my wife and kids at the time.”

At an air base in Saudi Arabia, the crews and pilots of an Air Force A-10 Thunderbolt II squadron have developed a safer system to augment the gas-detection meters.

Scattered around the base are several wire cages, each containing a chicken--the equivalent of the coal miner’s canary. Outside of command headquarters sits the cage of a bird nicknamed Buford. In honor of the chicken’s key assignment, the base newspaper has been dubbed Buford Talks.

“He’s a very important bird,” said Col. Bill Van Meter of Holyoke, Mass., the squadron commander. “As long as Buford talks, we’re in good shape.”

This story was compiled in part from reports reviewed by military censors.