Skip to main content

View Diary: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (459 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (1.00)
    You're kidding right? All it takes is Saddam pointing to places on a map and the US finiding the WMD's and the world-wide attitude about the US and Iraq changes. Capturing Saddam presents the administration with a veritable boon of potential information. Best case the administration puts the WMD's on public display at the UN, worst case they try Saddam for Crimes against humanity. In any case this is a blow to Democrats. Expect Bush's numbers to spike.

    -- What if it is just turtles all the way down?

    by Gary on Sun Dec 14, 2003 at 12:30:32 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
      Saddam is the only Iraqi to know these things?
      •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
        Guess so.  Must have put them all there himself.
      •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
        Yeah, what about those guys who said that they lied to SH about the existence b/c they didn't have the resources but also didn't want to let SH down?
      •  Sadaam Know where WsMD are? (none)
        Yeah, what about those guys who said that they lied to SH about the existence b/c they didn't have the resources but also didn't want to let SH down?
        •  uh, boss, we got bad news... (none)
          do you have support for this?  i once floated this as a joke, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.  if there's real evidence this might have happened, i'd be interested in corroboration.
          •  Re: uh, boss, we got bad news... (none)
            Oh, stop being so egocentric. You're not the origin, since I've seen this on Wired news, as well as in European news sources like the Guardian and Der Spiegel.

            Right now, it's the CW that Saddam had shut himself out of the loop through his brutal methods. All the smart ones had realised that the best way to stay alive was to tell the boss what he wanted to hear, and embezzle the money for the project. There have reportedly been quite a few that have admitted this.

            •  Re: uh, boss, we got bad news... (none)
              i'm not saying i'm "the" origin.  i'm saying when it first started to be clear iraq wasn't chock-a-block with vx and anthrax i started joking that maybe this is what happened.  i probably posted something along those lines here, but mostly i meant i was joking about it socially.  i'm sure plenty of other people had this idea, either as humor or as a viable speculation.

              all i was asking was whether there's actual evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, to support this scenario.  since pretty much everything those who opposed the war seems to have come true, it would be the ultimate vindication if a possibility worthy of a saturday night live skit turned out to be the reason we can't find the WMD.

              so if you have some sources (other than speculative pieces) please share.

    •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
      What does the Administration say if Saddam says there are not any WMDs, and Bush still can't find any?

      Signature Impaired.

      by gttim on Sun Dec 14, 2003 at 12:44:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (2.75)
        Wellll....
        1. Now that Saddam is captured and other Iraqis don't have to worry about retribution perhaps some tongues will loosen. As it is Saddam is perhaps the one person to be in the know about a great deal. Get him to talk and it will be a boon. Problem is you aren't going to do that without cutting a deal with him, which says to me that any trial would be done in the Hague.
        2. If Saddam doesn't give up an WMD's or if indeed there weren't any (and how could there not be we sold them to him) Then the administration plays up the 'crimes against humanity' issue. How big is the WMD issue at this point? Really, in the real world, where the majority of news watchers watch Fox? (and a larger majority don't watch news.)
        I'm liberal and a democrat, but I still don't get the whole dreamworld that people here on dKos live in. This is good news for our country, perhaps not as good as everyone would like, but capturing Saddam shows to the nation that the Administration CAN do something. It's going to be a big rallying point for a few days and will be a bone of contention between liberals and conservatives for a while. If the administration can get information out of Saddam that supports their WMD claims then we will be living in a new world. If they can't, or if there aren't WMD's then they're really not in that much worse of a possition as they are in now.

        -- What if it is just turtles all the way down?

        by Gary on Sun Dec 14, 2003 at 12:58:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
          You write:

          "This is good news for our country, perhaps not as good as everyone would like, but capturing Saddam shows to the nation that the Administration CAN do something."

          Let's hope it's not bad news for those living in countries on the US "To Invade" list.  

        •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
          As it is Saddam is perhaps the one person to be in the know about a great deal.

          I guess you have the same expectations of Bush, then?

          This is good news for our country, perhaps not as good as everyone would like, but capturing Saddam shows to the nation that the Administration CAN do something.

          They use to say Mussolini made the trains run on time, which is something.  That doesn't mean it's of the greatest priority, however.  Nor does it mean that harm cannot come from the unintended consequences, or the failure to prioritize properly.

          This is great news for Iraqis, I'll give you that.  But the book is still out on the value to Americans other than bragging power...

          And I'm a middle of the roader...

        •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
          and how could there not be [WsMD]we sold them to him

          According to Blix, the answer to this Q is that we bombed them into obliteration between since 1992.  Colin Powell was also under the impression (at least in May of 1991 when he addressed Congress) that Iraq was quite impotent, militarily.

          Color me shocked if anyone actually turns up 500 tons of VX or Serin.

          I guess we'll find out who's right in the coming months . . . or we won't.

        •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
          How two faced would it look in world opinion (forget the USA) if BushCo played the "crimes against humanity" card after brown nosing the PRC and shutting down democracy in Taiwan.

          There is nothing exciting about spending $100 billon, deploying 150K troops,losing 350+ US troops and wounding thousands, offering a $25MM reward to find one man who was trapped in Iraq.

          I always thought he was/would be killed in some type of action.

          Excellent news but hardly exciting. I guess there is no reason not to have general elections now.

        •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
          Gary, we found dangerour chemical weapons in the hands of terrorists way back in April, but it was in the hands of right-wing-nuts in Texas, so the Dubya Administration played it down. There are no weapons of mass descruction in Iraq. We would have found them long ago if there were.

          Certainly capturing Saddam is good news, and it should help our efforts to stabilize Iraq. Domestically, it helps Bush politically in the short term, but not necessarily in the long term.

          I doubt very much that anything that Saddam says will be allowed to reach the ears of the public. What he says could be embarrassing for the Dubya Administration. We'll suppress his words on the grounds of security.

        •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
          if indeed there weren't any (and how could there not be we sold them to him)

          Except for the fact that that was twenty to fifteen years ago and Sadam either used them up or they were destroyed after the first Gulf War (and most chemical and biological agents wouldn't survive 15 years without a sophisticated support program which we've since demonstrated did not exist any time recent).  

          In 1991, the IAEA found his nuclear weapons "program". It spent the next seven years dismantling any nuclear capability he had (which wasn't much) so there very surely weren't any nuclear weapons (which are really the only true weapons of mass distruction, certainly the only weapons that could really threaten us).

          NEWSWEEK - March 3 issue -- Hussein Kamel, the highest-ranking Iraqi official ever to defect from Saddam Hussein's inner circle, told CIA and British intelligence officers and U.N. inspectors in the summer of 1995 that after the gulf war, Iraq destroyed all its chemical and biological weapons stocks and the missiles to deliver them.

          Hans Blix, chief of the IAEA said, "I'm certainly more and more to the conclusion that Iraq has, as they maintained, destroyed almost all of what they had in the summer of 1991."  This was under the supervision of the UN, it meshes with the defector claims, it's supported by our billions of dollars worth of searching Iraq with thousands of experts - it's very likely the case.


           My candidate kisses babies. Your candidate is a mass murderer.

          by asa on Sun Dec 14, 2003 at 04:58:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
        What does the Administration say if Saddam says there are not any WMDs, and Bush still can't find any?

        Doesn't matter.  We win in double overtime by a field goal.  We rip down the goalposts, douse ourselves with champagne, and throw Gatorade all over our Commander in Thief.  All this nonsense about WMD won't matter one bit because the news of its nonexistence will be drowned out by the fact that we got that sonuvabitch Saddam Hussein.  Yes, most of us are really that stupid.

    •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (3.66)
      The selling of the whole "WMD" story has to be one of the best examples of propaganda and the manipulation of the media in modern times. The reason there are no WMDs to be found id simply because there aren't any weapons of MASS destruction. A couple of cases of mustard gas shells and some vials of unprocessed boctilin toxin don't put the M in mass. It is 100% clear to anyone that even if these chemical or biological devices where sitting in some storeroom somewhere the infrastructure to deploy it in the field and the required command structure surrounding that was not there. It is a matter of logistics and supply and there would have to be evidence of that. The worse that might of happened would be one or two uncoordinated isolated incidents that don't come even close to meeting the Mass requirement and as we all know even that did not come to pass.

      As for Nukes, the only real player in the Mass definition, again you have to consider what it takes to have even a "down low" program going on. The original UNSCOM inspectors did in fact dismantle Saddam's nascent nuclear program in the 90's - one of the reasons they did so is the various paper trails left by such a program and the following up where those trails pointed to. This isn't rocket science, just good work by people who understand this field.

      But even if we don't accept that as sufficient proof, don't you think that at this point after we have interviewed countless numbers of scientists, administrative clerks, practically his whole officer corps and a vast array of cloke and dagger types and not one of them has pointed to a map and said "there it is"? And what about that team that we dispatched to scour the country hunting for these WMDS? What are they doing now? Think thumbs and twiddling...

      •  Re: Saddam Captured; What's Next? (none)
        I agree that the nukes angle was way overplayed. For one thing, it's been 58 years since the world discovered nukes and all manner of tyrant has longed for them, yet even China, with its manpower, has a relatively unsophisticated arsenal.

        I get the impression that the scientists working for him were simply not eager to deliver.

        Cowboy Kahlil
        Assume Authority and be kind to your horse. You never know when you'll need to make a fast getaway.

        by Cowboy Kahlil on Sun Dec 14, 2003 at 04:02:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (145)
  • Community (63)
  • 2016 (41)
  • Environment (40)
  • Republicans (37)
  • Elections (34)
  • Culture (34)
  • Bernie Sanders (32)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Media (26)
  • Labor (25)
  • Climate Change (25)
  • Education (24)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Barack Obama (23)
  • Spam (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • GOP (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (21)
  • Science (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site