|Posted on Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 09:18 pm: |
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 03:42 am: |
Not enough said... yet!
But if he goes on trial, there might be.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 04:42 am: |
Who will try him? The US-picked Iraqi council? Talk about a kangaroo court! A US military tribunal? Oh yeah, that'll be a fair trial! The International Court in the Hague? On what basis? That he has been captured by illegal invaders of the country he ruled, albeit as a cold-blooded dictator? My prediction is that far from accomplishing any mission, far from clearing any waters, this will only muddy them further everywhere save here in the US, where Bush will trumpet the capture as the tangible proof of victory.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 07:02 am: |
Saddam Hussein alive! It's a Christmas miracle!
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 07:18 am: |
And of course, there's the perfectly reasonable possibility that it's not Saddam at all....
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 08:01 am: |
I'm with Lucius. This is likely an impersonator recruited from a pool of trained professional impersonators. My sister lives in Vegas, and she's told me she's seen a noticable drop-off recently in the number of Elvises (Elvii?) walking the streets. I think this "Saddam" person should be made to shake his hips, point his finger, and intone "Uhthankuhvurramuch" on television. Then we'll know the truth.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 08:05 am: |
Fake or real, the guy makes a timely Xmas present...and this adminitration has never been subtle in its use of timing....
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 08:11 am: |
Well, they certainly aren't very graceful or noble. There is really little more disgusting than to see Bush and Rumsfield crowing--the lot of them talking about 'rats' and 'cowards'. . . .
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 08:23 am: |
"Graceful" and "noble," I'm afraid, went out with whalebone corsets....
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 09:00 am: |
I can't face four more years. I can't . . .
Anybody know any Canadian real estate agents?
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 11:41 am: |
Hey, I think there's a vacant one-bedroom in Tikrit.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 11:44 am: |
Graceful and noble were their own P.R. campaign in their own day, and a thin veneer over the same alpha-male, sportscaster-style aggression we see today. Politics aside, I *do* hope this improves chances of calming things down in Iraq. The innocent in Iraq, if there are any left, deserve better than what they've been getting.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 12:12 pm: |
As or hoping for calm, the only way things will calm down is if there's an actual government in Iraq and not a bunch of spineless puppets... What are the odds, you figure?
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 12:19 pm: |
Well, at least we nailed the guy who attacked the US--oh wait.
At least we caught the guy who was producing WMD--oh wait.
As someone who works in the giant bullseye known as New York City, Bush's ability to further polarize the Mideast does little to assuage my fears. I sincerely hope it bodes well for the Iraqi people, but it doesn't address any of the true underlying issues about terrorism a/g the US, and probably exacerbates the situation, having increased the ranks of disgruntled, disaffected Muslim youth willing to give their lives to try and take mine. Oh boy . . .
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 12:20 pm: |
Of course, if NYC were taken out, Bush might be able to carry New York in the next election (the upside being I wouldn't be here to see it/live with it).
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 02:15 pm: |
Yeah. Wonderful that Saddam is gone but all this means is that Bush Inc. was finally able to pull a rabbit out of their hat in the great magic distraction show.
I hate how this is tearing me in half. I want the Midle East to be peaceful and free and I want to be able to afford retirement but I don't want it to appear that Bush is responsible because he is gutting everything about this country that I care about.
Oh and I am back to watching for mushroom clouds and plummeting airliners.
Thanks W and Merry Christmas
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 02:37 pm: |
Better the rabbit now than in October 2004! Oh wait, that's when we have the next terrorist attack! Talk about October surprise. These guys make Nixon look like a choirboy.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 03:57 pm: |
At last! a post in the war section... I was beginning to think that either:
a) Everyone had gone off to fratch elsewhere.
b) The debates were still going on here, but I was being excluded because my PC was conspiring against me. - It does do that!
c) Real peace had broken out ten days ago and I'd missed it.
I only discovered this forum 5 days ago and having read and enjoyed this section (especially the threat of fisticuffs on the 'American Werewolf' thread), I've waited patiently for things to kick off again. Indeed, I was about to overcame my morbid fear of being savaged online and start a thread of my own, when...
Excellent news! Saddam captured! That's bound to get things moving in the NightShades war section again! Oh dear, am I really that shallow?
Anyway, back to the issues...
And of course, there's the perfectly reasonable possibility that it's not Saddam at all....
Whilst I wouldn't put it past them (US/UK gov's) to contemplate such a deception, I would seriously question their ability to carry it off. I would have thought finding WMD would have been a more likely scenario... Much easier to fake than DNA and the identity confirmation by many people who knew/know Saddam. Maybe I'll believe it if WMD are found more conveniently near to US/UK elections!
If it really is him (and I think it is), it's curious that early reports suggested that he was being uncooperative and defiant, then later reports imply that he's cooperating (source: BBC R5). The question that springs to my mind is: 'Is he being tortured?' (part of me hopes yes and [a larger] part of me hopes no - Hopes aside, I think: Probably, but subtly!)
To my mind, the most striking aspect of this story is the way that the credit for the intelligence leading to his capture has shifted from; Kurdish troop intelligence; to a tip-off from a family member; to (the latest) a vigilant American soldier spotting a 'tuft of fiber.'
Could this be media manipulation to paint the best picture for an American audience?
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 04:12 pm: |
I'm with Minz--I can't take 4 more years of this crap, either.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 04:33 pm: |
Minz & JV,
Chill out! Even if this current batch of crap comes to an unexpected conclusion. Another batch will come along and take its place.
Strange that while Elvii incidence declines in Vegas, it proliferates in London!
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 04:48 pm: |
I can't take anyone who calls themselves Anthonymous seriously when they talk about the curent and later batches of crap. For all I know, you're part of the current batch of crap.
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 05:01 pm: |
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 05:26 pm: |
For all I know, you're part of the current batch of crap.
In as much as I did vote for the current UK government, I suppose I am. And I'll probably do it again (even though I hate Bliar) because the alternative is even more undesirable.
As for my choice of online persona - Since I'm not someone that you or anyone else here knows, or will ever likely know in person, What is the relevance of what I call myself?
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 07:09 pm: |
I can't help thinking think the U.S. really fucked-up by capturing Hussein alive. Surely it would have made more sense to murder him during the arrest than grant him the opportunity to mouth-off at a trial. Now, if he doesn’t have an accident in the meantime, he has another chance to polarize world opinion about the illegal invasion of his country. Can anybody figure out the U.S.'s strategy here?
|Posted on Monday, December 15, 2003 - 11:43 pm: |
Strategy? Go with the flow and tell a dozen lies for every truth. . . . If the people are against you, bribe some Supreme Court judges. If you dont have the evidence forge it. . . .
|Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 08:21 am: |
Strategy = Throw a bone to the Iraqi people by permitting THEM to put Saddam on ice.
As for Saddam's capture reducing violence in Iraq, even the current administration hasn't claimed that. This will probably, in fact, increase violence in the region. Why? Follow the bouncing ball...
Saddam was found in a hole; he had been there for some time.
A guy in a hole is not directing resistance movements.
Resistance movements are not dependent upon a guy in a hole.
Therefore, resistance is independent of, and will likely continue with or without, a guy in a hole.
Saddam's whereabouts were previously unknown.
A person whose whereabouts are unknown may be anywhere, and may return at any time.
Had the U.S. been ousted from the region, Saddam might have returned at any time and challenged whoever ousted the U.S. from the region.
Saddam has now been found. In a hole. Where he had been for some time.
Saddam will now be killed. Most likely by the Iraqi government-substitute, in the name of the Iraqi people.
A dead guy, in or out of a hole, cannot return to challenge whoever ousts the U.S. from the region.
Resistance will intensify in the short term because, behind the thin veneer of the U.S. marionette show, a power vacuum waits for anyone who is bold enough and organized enough and persistent enough to capture the flag. This doesn't even take into account that some of the resistance movements are doubtless nationalist, and nationalists aren't going to sit still and smile at the puppet show.
|Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 11:12 am: |
I thought for sure BushCo was going to wait until the US was further into the election proccess before they captured Saddam. I guess Karl Rove must be running of out cards to play. I hope the next card is not a "Major Terrorist Attack" that leads to a declaration of marshel law, and a suspension of elections all together.
-Jeremy -- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get me -- Lassen
|Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 11:24 am: |
Jeremy: "I thought for sure BushCo was going to wait until the US was further into the election proccess before they captured Saddam."
No, the October Surprise will be Osama.
"The question is not whether you're paranoid, Lenny. It's whether you're paranoid ENOUGH."
|Posted on Wednesday, December 17, 2003 - 02:11 am: |
"I thought for sure BushCo was going to wait until the US was further into the election proccess before they captured Saddam."
Perhaps they found out he was just about to turn himself in - or do himself in - and they thought they better get in and capture him, quick.
|Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 05:47 am: |
When will they learn? Another lie passed off as truth by the administration and military, and supinely repeated by the US media. In the immortal words of our president: "So what's the difference?"
Saddam was held by Kurdish forces, drugged and left for US troops
LONDON, (AFP) - Saddam Hussein was captured by US troops only after he had been taken prisoner by Kurdish forces, drugged and abandoned ready for American soldiers to recover him, a British Sunday newspaper said.
Saddam came into the hands of the Kurdish Patriotic Front after being betrayed to the group by a member of the al-Jabour tribe, whose daughter had been raped by Saddam's son Uday, leading to a blood feud, reported the Sunday Express, which quoted an unnamed senior British military intelligence officer.
The newspaper said the full story of events leading up to the ousted Iraqi president's capture on December 13 near his hometown of Tikrit in northern Iraq (news - web sites), "exposes the version peddled by American spin doctors as incomplete".
A former Iraqi intelligence officer, whom the Express did not name, told the paper that Saddam was held prisoner by a leader of the Kurdish Patriotic Front, which fought alongside US forces during the Iraq war, until he negotiated a deal.
The deal apparently involved the group gaining political advantage in the region.
An unnamed Western intelligence source in the Middle East told the Express: "Saddam was not captured as a result of any American or British intelligence. We knew that someone would eventually take their revenge, it was just a matter of time."
|Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 08:46 am: |
Sounds about right to me.
|Posted on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 09:42 pm: |
Maybe true, maybe not. Why is this particular lone piece of news intelligence given priority over others? It could just as easily be propaganda as any official piece of news put out by the administration.
|Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 04:08 am: |
True enough, Karl. More digging is necessary, though as yet, unsurpisingly, the US-based media has ignored this story.
But the track record of official pronouncements by the military and administration in this war, from WMD to the toppling of Saddam's statue in Baghdad to Jessica Lynch to Bush's Thanksgiving visit, has not exactly been unblemished. Given that record, I find it quite easy, and in keeping with previous statements given by the military/administration, to believe the story.
|Posted on Monday, December 22, 2003 - 12:01 pm: |
Interesting timing... Lends credence the "Kurdish Deal with US for Saddam" theory. Kurds probably negotiated autonomy as part of the turn over.