Saddam captured in raid..

Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.
Matt
Posts: 539
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 11:24 pm
What color are leaves?: Green
Spam?: No
Location: People's Republic of Maryland

Saddam captured in raid..

Postby Matt » Sun Dec 14, 2003 2:43 pm


User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4592
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Sun Dec 14, 2003 4:28 pm

A great symbolic victory, but unfortunately a fairly meaningless tactical one. Ie, great for Bush, bad for Democrats.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:22 pm

Though I opposed (and still oppose) the invasion, we're now in a "you broke it, you bought it" situation in Iraq. Saddam's capture can only be a good thing in this context, as the occupation may start to go a little better (if Saddam was indeed behind large elements of the resistance) and the Iraqi populace may be more willing to work toward a new gov't without the implied threat of a loose Saddam coming back.

But mostly it's a big PR bonanza for the White House. The biggest upside I see is that now with the Saddam "Deck Of Cards" Sideshow out of the way, maybe more pressure will be brought to bear on the administration to go after the *real* architects and backers of 9/11. All we've done here, remember, is capture someone who never attacked the United States. He's a war criminal and a despot, to be sure, and should be tried as such (even though we were backing him at the time he committed his war crimes in the 80s). But al-Qaeda and the extremists who back them remain the bigger threats.

Most of the Iraqi people will in all likelihood be better off without him, though it remains to be seen what will replace him.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4592
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:44 pm

Rspaight wrote:Saddam's capture can only be a good thing in this context, as the occupation may start to go a little better (if Saddam was indeed behind large elements of the resistance)


Based on the early reports of his habitation, that's a big "if". While we'll find out more in the coming days/weeks/months, it seems doubtful he was behind much of anything.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

Mike Hunte
Senior Troll
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 4:48 pm
Location: Bed

Postby Mike Hunte » Sun Dec 14, 2003 11:35 pm

And that's the irony of these so-called symbolic victories. If a bomb had fallen on Saddam's head the first night of the attacks, killing him in the process, and things played out as they most likely would have (that is, pretty much the same way they already have), the heat would still be up on the Administration for the same tactical, ethical and diplomatic "reasons" that were the impetus of this phony war.

Yet, because he goes down *now* instead of then, the political spinners and the media whores will probably annoint GWB as some sort of conquering liberator. Forgetting the all-important particulars along the way. It's all about the symbols to Joe America, folks. They prefer images of statues toppling, flags waiving, and people dancing in the streets, then much of the factual material (e.g. no bid contracts for the Bush gang, the Iraqui oil that will grease the Cheney family's pockets for the next 50 generations). By tomorrow, our un-elected President will probably be toasting his 20-point spike in the polls, regardless of his "no gloating" decree.

Furthermore, rather than unite as a cohesive unit, the select turncoat Democratic Presidential hopefuls can't scramble fast enough to try and milk this for some political mileage. Joe Lieberman was frothing at the mouth today with glee. He might as well run on Bush's ticket as the VP...

Of course, Saddam was a ruthless fuck who deserves everything he gets and more. But, the US is still in bed with far more heinous creatures than him. I don't suspect we'll be attacking China in the near future and jeopordizing the most-favored-nation trading status we've come to reap the benefits of.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Mon Dec 15, 2003 9:04 am

Joe Lieberman was frothing at the mouth today with glee. He might as well run on Bush's ticket as the VP...


Yeah, I saw that. "Me and Bush were right all along! Ha ha ha! If you're one of the three people who hate Bush but love the Iraq war, vote for me! Whee!"

What a tool.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Grant
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:53 pm
Location: Arizona

Postby Grant » Tue Dec 16, 2003 6:19 am

...and while all this is happening, Americans continue to lose jobs due to American corporations exporting jobs to other countries to take advantage of cheap labor...

Just think, one day you could lose your already low-paying job to an Iraqi.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Mon Dec 22, 2003 10:47 am

Of course, now we learn (through foreign media, natch) that the US had nothing at all to do with Saddam's capture -- the Kurds actually got him and then handed him over to us.

Saddam was held by Kurdish forces, drugged and left for US troops
Sat Dec 20, 11:00 PM ET

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."

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Mon Dec 22, 2003 1:17 pm

Here's a more detailed account:

‘Kurdish forces nabbed & drugged Saddam’

Press Trust of India

LONDON, Dec. 21. — Ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was captured by Kurdish forces, then drugged and handed over to the American forces as a revenge against the rape of a tribal chief’s daughter by the tyrant’s psychopathic eldest son Uday, a media report said today.

The full story of the fallen dictator’s capture last Saturday in a “spider hole” near his birthplace of Tikrit exposes the version peddled by Americans as incomplete.

According to the report in The Sunday Express, Saddam had already been handed over to Kurdish forces, who then brokered a deal with US commanders. He was drugged and abandoned, ready for the American troops to recover him. Saddam was betrayed to the Kurds by a member of the Al-Jabour tribe whose daughter was “defiled” by Uday, the report quoting a senior British military intelligence officer said. “There was no question of the tribe claiming the £16 million reward from the US. Apparently it was a question of honour.

The Kurdish Patriotic Front held him while they thrashed out their own deal. It didn’t just involve the reward but it involved gaining some sort of political advantage in the region.” There had been bad blood between the dictator and the al-Jabour tribe since the raped woman’s husband tried to take revenge and was shot by Uday’s bodyguard. The tribe threatened to take revenge. As soon as he heard the news, Saddam visited the family of the dead man and paid them £7 million in blood money with the chilling warning: “If you try to take revenge you will force me to wipe out the Al-Jabour tribe.” The news that Saddam was a prisoner and not in hiding would explain his dishevelled state when he was found by Kurdish special forces from the patriotic front and US soldiers.

He was unable to climb out of the hole on his own because the lid that covered it was also sealed down with a carpet and some rubble. A former Iraqi intelligence officer now living in Qatar said he believed Saddam was betrayed shortly after his last audio message was released to the world via Arab television on 16 November. “He was dumped in that hole in Ad Dawr after being handed over to the patriotic front by his own tribesmen and held prisoner until Jalal Talabani made his own negotiations,” said the Iraqi. Talabani is a leader of the Patriotic Front, one of two main Kurdish parties in northern Iraq who fought alongside US forces during the war. One report said Saddam’s cook spiked his food before he was delivered to the front.

According to the report, a western intelligence source stationed in the Middle East said: “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. The net really began to close when his family fled to Jordan and Uday and Qusay were killed in Mosul. A £20-million reward went to the informant who gave information on their hiding place. However, I doubt if the reward for Saddam will be paid to those directly responsible for his capture. They will consider the family honour has been avenged... in Iraqi tribal society it would be frowned upon to accept money.” Immediately after the raid in which Saddam was captured, jubilant Kurdish officials leaked the news to an Iranian news agency hours before the US had a chance to make an official announcement to the assembled media in Baghdad.

The report also said secret talks are under way to fix a deal in which Saddam will be detained for life in a Qatari prison after his showcase trial. Intense behind-the-scene negotiations, brokered by Britain, will see the former dictator jailed in the tiny Gulf state, which is host to several US military bases, if the Iraqi court does not push for his execution.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

Matt
Posts: 539
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 11:24 pm
What color are leaves?: Green
Spam?: No
Location: People's Republic of Maryland

Postby Matt » Mon Dec 22, 2003 3:31 pm

More detailed yes, and I hope accurate. I bet many want to claim the capture.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Mon Dec 22, 2003 4:14 pm

It has at least a bit of credibility on the surface, if you cross-reference this from the above:

“He was dumped in that hole in Ad Dawr after being handed over to the patriotic front by his own tribesmen and held prisoner until Jalal Talabani made his own negotiations,” said the Iraqi. Talabani is a leader of the Patriotic Front, one of two main Kurdish parties in northern Iraq who fought alongside US forces during the war...

Immediately after the raid in which Saddam was captured, jubilant Kurdish officials leaked the news to an Iranian news agency hours before the US had a chance to make an official announcement to the assembled media in Baghdad.


with this from a story from December 15:

Jalal Talabani, a former president of the Iraqi Governing Council and leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, broke the news just after 9am UK time, first telling reporters in Iraq and at the Iranian News Agency of the discovery. However, the details were still sketchy.

At 9.55am Reuters snapped a report on the Iranian News Agency reports that he had been captured and by 10.06am the agency confirmed it first-hand quoting Jalal Talabani himself.


Bremer's "we got him" announcement came at noon UK time. It would make sense that Talabani knew of Saddam's capture three hours prior to the official announcement if he had in fact been the one who captured him.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4592
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Mon Dec 22, 2003 5:29 pm

It will be interesting to see what Saddam's role in things was with this new information, as he apparently wasn't "living in a hole" all this time.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:13 pm

The NY Times had an interesting piece yesterday on how US sources say Saddam spent his time after the fall of Baghdad:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/inter ... 1SADD.html

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Fri Jan 09, 2004 1:49 pm

Now we get the below. Sounds like the Kurds got what they wanted in exchange for Bush's "I captured Saddam" PR bonanza.

The road to an Iraqi civil war continues... cross-reference the Arab-Kurd violence of the past several days in Kirkuk.

Kurdish Region in Northern Iraq Will Get to Keep Special Status
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN

ASHINGTON, Jan. 4 — The Bush administration has decided to let the Kurdish region remain semi-autonomous as part of a newly sovereign Iraq despite warnings from Iraq's neighbors and many Iraqis not to divide the country into ethnic states, American and Iraqi officials say.

The officials said their new position on the Kurdish area was effectively dictated by the Nov. 15 accord with Iraqi leaders that established June 30 as the target date for Iraqi self-rule. Such a rapid timetable, they said, has left no time to change the autonomy and unity of the Kurdish stronghold of the north, as many had originally wanted.

"Once we struck the Nov. 15 agreement, there was a realization that it was best not to touch too heavily on the status quo," said an administration official. "The big issue of federalism in the Kurdish context will have to wait for the Iraqis to resolve. For us to try to resolve it in a month or two is simply too much to attempt."

The issue of whether Iraq is to be divided into ethnic states in a federation-style government is of great significance both inside the country and throughout the Middle East, where fears are widespread that dividing Iraq along ethnic or sectarian lines could eventually break the country up and spread turmoil in the region.

Administration and Iraq officials insist that leaving the Kurdish autonomous region intact does not preclude Iraq's consolidating itself without ethnic states in the future when Iraq writes its own constitution. Indeed, the Bush administration plans to continue to press Iraq not to divide itself permanently along ethnic lines, officials say.

But after June 30, if all goes according to plan, the United States will be exerting such pressure not as an occupier but as a friendly outside power that happens to have 100,000 troops on the ground. Many experts fear that once a Kurdish government is formalized even temporarily, it will be hard to dislodge.

The original timetable for the transfer of sovereignty to Iraq called for self-rule to start in late 2004 or 2005 — after a constitution was written under American guidance. Under that timetable, American officials say, it would have been easier to influence a future government's makeup, not just on its federal structure but also on such matters as the role of Islamic law.

The new, earlier deadline, intended to ease Iraqi hostility to the occupation and to undermine support for continuing attacks on American troops, has forced the United States to scrap many of its other earlier plans for the future of Iraq.

Originally, for example, the United States had hoped to proceed with the privatization of state-owned businesses established by Saddam Hussein. That hope is now gone as well, American officials concede, in part because of security dangers and possible future legal challenges to any sell-off carried out by an occupying power.

Last summer, L. Paul Bremer III, the American administrator in Iraq, told an economic forum in Jordan that Iraq would soon start privatizing more than 40 government-owned companies making packaged foods, steel and other items. "Everybody knows we cannot wait until there is an elected government here to start economic reform," he said.

Now Mr. Bremer says repeatedly that such decisions must await Iraqi self-rule.

The precise terms of the future status of the Kurdish region in the transitional government, which is expected to last until the end of 2005, remain a matter of sharp dispute among members of the Iraqi Governing Council, the group handpicked by the American-led occupation that helps guide Iraq's future.

The five Kurdish members of the council are pressing their own draft of a planned temporary constitution — known as the "transitional law" — that would give the Kurdish area wide authority over security, taxation and especially revenues from its own oil fields, according to Iraqi and American officials. Their draft would call for the Kurdish area to be a part of Iraq, and cede at least some powers to Baghdad, most likely in areas like currency and security forces.

The Kurdish region has enjoyed basic autonomy since 1991, when the United States followed the first Persian Gulf war by establishing a no-flight zone there to prevent Mr. Hussein's military from attacking.

"The status quo, with substantial Kurdish autonomy, will to a certain degree remain in place in the transitional period," said an administration official. "That is the view across-the-board of the Iraqi Governing Council. But clearly the Kurds are trying to get more than that."

The Bush administration has many times stated its opposition to a permanent arrangement of ethnic states in Iraq, fearing that the country might eventually become another Lebanon, where power is parceled out according to religion.

While visiting the Kurdish region in September, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said that while he sympathized with Kurdish aspirations and understood that their leaders did not want to break away from Iraq, he was opposed to a separate Kurdish province or state as such.

"We would not wish to see a political system that is organized on ethnic lines," Mr. Powell said. "There are other ways to do it that would not essentially bring into the future the ethnic problems that have been there all along. They understand that, and we'll have different models to show them."

In Baghdad, a 10-member subcommittee of the Iraqi Governing Council is now wrestling with its own "models" of how to define the Kurdish area's powers. The committee is trying to meld its own draft with one put forward by the Kurds, officials said. The subcommittee chairman is Adnan Pachachi, a former Iraqi foreign minister who is a Sunni Muslim.

"There is a substantial agreement that the status quo in the Kurdish region would be maintained during the transitional period, with an important caveat," said Feisel Istrabadi, a law professor at DePauw University and senior legal adviser to Dr. Pachachi. "No one is conceding any ethnic or confessional grounds as the basis for any future federal state."

Mr. Istrabadi, who is in Baghdad helping Dr. Pachachi's committee draft the transitional law to take effect after June 30, said most Iraqis would oppose the establishment of ethnic states. He said such an arrangement would be inappropriate given that Iraq does not have the history of ethnic or sectarian strife that has led to partition of states in other parts of the world.

Some experts have suggested that Iraq should be divided into a Kurdish enclave in the north, a Sunni one in the center and a Shiite one in the south. But this idea has little support at the Iraqi Governing Council and none with the United States.

"You know what the largest Kurdish city in Iraq is?" asked Mr. Istrabadi. "It's Baghdad. It isn't like you could draw a line in Iraq and say the Kurds live here or the Assyrians, the Chaldeans, or the Turkomans or the Shiites or the Sunnis live there. In the supposedly Shiite south, there are a million Sunnis in Basra."

The Kurdish region is dominated by two feuding political parties that have been struggling to form a unified government in order to strengthen their hand in pushing for a federalist system that would give them broad autonomy into the future.

At present, Iraq is divided into 18 states, known as governorates, of which three are Kurdish in the mountainous area of the north. A permanently unified Kurdish state stirs worries especially in Turkey and Iran, where there are large and restive Kurdish minorities.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney