Who Really Caught Saddam?

Printable View

12-21-2003, 11:08 AM
3rd gen noob

"Kurdish special forces, not US troops were the first to corner Saddam Hussein in last weekend's operation that siezed the former Iraqi leader near his home town of Tikrit, writes David Pratt.
The unit of Peshmerga fighters, part of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) working on thier own key intelligence, sealed off the area around the al-Dawr farmhouse long before the arrival of US forces, insists its leader Qusrat Rasul Ali"

Source: Sunday Herald, 21st December 2003

a matter of the americans claiming credit for others work?
surely not...?
12-21-2003, 11:13 AM
balamm

But it was all coordinated by the brits of course. Every part of it. You know those kashmirgas and Peshmerga can't do a damn thing without you.
:)
12-21-2003, 11:18 AM
chalice

When watching the first news reports on BBC last Sunday, I was aware within seconds that Kurdish fighters supplied the information leading to Saddam's arrest.

To be honest, I've been wondering about it all week.

How long did they know? Why didn't they take him themselves?

What bargain did they strike for this information? Or did they hand him over on a gleeful whim?

Considering what he did to the Kurds, it must have been very difficult for them not to simply take him away and torture him for a couple of months.
12-21-2003, 11:31 AM
3RA1N1AC

bush's approval rating in public opinion polls actually went up after saddam hussein was captured. my first thought was "sheesh, it's not as if bush went out and personally caught saddam, himself!" :rolleyes:
12-21-2003, 02:41 PM
adjective-noun-number

Quote:

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC@21 December 2003 - 11:31
bush's approval rating in public opinion polls actually went up after saddam hussein was captured.  my first thought was "sheesh, it's not as if bush went out and personally caught saddam, himself!"  :rolleyes:

He went undercover B)
12-21-2003, 03:16 PM
FatBastard

Quote:

Originally posted by balamm@21 December 2003 - 20:13
But it was all coordinated by the brits of course. Every part of it. You know those kashmirgas and Peshmerga can't do a damn thing without you.
:)

Another anti-British post? Getting to be quite a habit, eh?
12-23-2003, 12:03 AM
RAM%ROD

It's hard to believe that if the kurds caught him they wouldn't execute him on the spot for the chemical attack that killed all those kurds in the 80's and various other brutal acts. I'm thinking someones trying to stake a claim on the 35 million dollar reward money.
12-23-2003, 12:05 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by RAM%ROD@22 December 2003 - 23:03
It's hard to believe that if the kurds caught him they wouldn't execute him on the spot for the chemical attack that killed all those kurds in the 80's and various other brutal acts. I'm thinking someones trying to stake a claim on the 35 million dollar reward money.

and i'm thinking that someone (i.e. america) is trying to falsely claim the credit :)
12-23-2003, 12:10 AM
J'Pol

I mean this as no offence to anyone who has posted here.

The intricacies and Machiavellian machinations of international diplomacy are of little interest to me.

The murdering bastard has been caught. That satisfies me.
12-23-2003, 12:12 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:10
The murdering bastard has been caught. That satisfies me.

of course, that's the main thing...

i merely posted this due to the fact that i found the american proclamation of "we got him"! to be incorrect :)
12-23-2003, 12:18 AM
J'Pol

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+23 December 2003 - 01:12--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 23 December 2003 - 01:12)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:10
The murdering bastard has been caught. That satisfies me.

of course, that's the main thing...

i merely posted this due to the fact that i found the american proclamation of "we got him"! to be incorrect :) [/b][/quote]
"We" presumably referred to the Allied Forces. That's how I heard it.

I took it that We were partners, not a group of people supporting an American action.

I remain of that opinion.
12-23-2003, 12:21 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:18
"We" presumably referred to the Allied Forces. That's how I heard it.

I took it that We were partners, not a group of people supporting an American action.

I remain of that opinion.

i never heard the kurdistan forces mentioned alongside the allied forces though...
12-23-2003, 12:29 AM
RAM%ROD

I just wish they threw a grenade in the hole like were going to until Saddam pussied out.
12-23-2003, 12:31 AM
J'Pol

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+23 December 2003 - 01:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 23 December 2003 - 01:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:18
"We" presumably referred to the Allied Forces. That's how I heard it.

I took it that We were partners, not a group of people supporting an American action.

I remain of that opinion.

i never heard the kurdistan forces mentioned alongside the allied forces though... [/b][/quote]
Were they not fighting the same enemy, or is that not enough for you.

What do you want, a piece of paper signed, a common language or ideology.

I really felt that the We referred to everyone who was against his regime. If you feel differently, that is cool. It is good that we can discuss the minutiae now. That generally means that the big issues, for the most part, have been dealt with.

Like I said before, there are always wheels within wheels, in this instance they bother me not one jot. However I have nothing but respect for the position you are taking
12-23-2003, 12:31 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by RAM%ROD@22 December 2003 - 23:29
I just wish they threw a grenade in the hole like were going to until Saddam pussied out.

intelligent debate indeed ;)
12-23-2003, 12:32 AM
J'Pol

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+23 December 2003 - 01:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 23 December 2003 - 01:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-RAM%ROD@22 December 2003 - 23:29
I just wish they threw a grenade in the hole like were going to until Saddam pussied out.

intelligent debate indeed ;) [/b][/quote]
I agree - after my last, I so wish I had said what he said instead.
12-23-2003, 12:33 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:31
Were they not fighting the same enemy, or is that not enough for you.

What do you want, a piece of paper signed, a common language or ideology.

I really felt that the We referred to everyone who was against his regime. If you feel differently, that is cool. It is good that we can discuss the minutiae now. That generally means that the big issues, for the most part, have been dealt with.

Like I said before, there are always wheels within wheels, in this instance they bother me not one jot. However I have nothing but respect for the position you are taking

the whole affair just smacks of the "we saved your ass in world war 2" thinking...

you're right though :)
12-23-2003, 12:41 AM
hobbes

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+23 December 2003 - 01:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 23 December 2003 - 01:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:18
"We" presumably referred to the Allied Forces. That's how I heard it.

I took it that We were partners, not a group of people supporting an American action.

I remain of that opinion.

i never heard the kurdistan forces mentioned alongside the allied forces though...[/b][/quote]
Quibbling details is sour grapes.

"We" got him could mean many things depending on how far you need to twist them.

As an American, had the Kurdish soldiers pulled him out and given him to us, the statement would have been just as valid.

We do "got" (have physical possession) of him.

Had we said, "Americans have found him", that would have been different.

Such silly cheap comments really reveal more about the issues of the poster than anything else.

Thanks for that, Chipply vonShoulder.
12-23-2003, 12:43 AM
J'Pol

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+23 December 2003 - 01:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 23 December 2003 - 01:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J'Pol@22 December 2003 - 23:31
Were they not fighting the same enemy, or is that not enough for you.

What do you want, a piece of paper signed, a common language or ideology.

I really felt that the We referred to everyone who was against his regime. If you feel differently, that is cool. It is good that we can discuss the minutiae now. That generally means that the big issues, for the most part, have been dealt with.

Like I said before, there are always wheels within wheels, in this instance they bother me not one jot. However I have nothing but respect for the position you are taking

the whole affair just smacks of the "we saved your ass in world war 2" thinking...

you're right though :)[/b][/quote]
That's part of the deal mate.

It's like having a really big and strong best pal. They think that you like them and that they are part of the gang, when in fact you keep them about to scare the bad boys away.

So if they want to believe (and shout about) how big and clever they are, it is cool. It keeps them happy and ensures that they will be there the next time you need them. Even tho' someone else did the actual thinking for them.

They aren't really that clever, but would you tell your big, dead hard mate that. No, I think not. You would say "You are right JimBob, way to go big man. Do you want some more bacon on your buttered waffle and another chilled beer perhaps".

That's how it works. They may be hard of thinking, but they are handy to have about.
12-23-2003, 12:47 AM
hobbes

All I care about is that Saddam is caught, the rest is irrelevant. I didn't vote for Bush the first time, and I won't in 2004.
12-23-2003, 01:03 AM
J'Pol

Quote:

Originally posted by hobbes@23 December 2003 - 01:47
All I care about is that Saddam is caught, the rest is irrelevant.

I totally and without reservation agree.
12-23-2003, 01:19 AM
Cheese

Quote:

Originally posted by J'Pol+23 December 2003 - 00:03--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J'Pol @ 23 December 2003 - 00:03)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@23 December 2003 - 01:47
All I care about is that Saddam is caught, the rest is irrelevant.

I totally and without reservation agree. [/b][/quote]
It's great that Saddam has been caught but I really feel that it is important that future generations know as much truth as possible and not just the spin of whichever government ws in power at the time.

Americans capturing Saddam has been great for Bush and his reelection chances, but how much is spin and how much is truth. This whole war has been fought like this and perhaps we'll never get all the truth out of it...
12-23-2003, 03:21 AM
mrlessk

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob@22 December 2003 - 15:33

the whole affair just smacks of the "we saved your ass in world war 2" thinking...

Is this disputable? :mellow:
12-23-2003, 03:25 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by mrlessk+23 December 2003 - 02:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mrlessk @ 23 December 2003 - 02:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob@22 December 2003 - 15:33

the whole affair just smacks of the "we saved your ass in world war 2" thinking...

Is this disputable? :mellow: [/b][/quote]
last christmas my brother bought me a really nice present
i was obviously pleased he bought me the present
however, during the last year, every time he wants me to do something, he says "remember what i got you for christmas" to try and persuade me to help him

:)
12-23-2003, 03:34 AM
hobbes

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+23 December 2003 - 04:25--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 23 December 2003 - 04:25)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

Originally posted by mrlessk@23 December 2003 - 02:21
<!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob

Quote:

@22 December 2003 - 15:33

the whole affair just smacks of the "we saved your ass in world war 2" thinking...

Is this disputable? :mellow:

last christmas my brother bought me a really nice present
i was obviously pleased he bought me the present
however, during the last year, every time he wants me to do something, he says "remember what i got you for christmas" to try and persuade me to help him

:) [/b][/quote]
Well, what is that bitch giving you this year?
12-23-2003, 03:35 AM
3rd gen noob

Quote:

Originally posted by hobbes@23 December 2003 - 02:34
Well, what is that bitch giving you this year?

hopefully some fecking peace and quiet :)
12-23-2003, 03:45 AM
balamm

Quote:

Originally posted by FatBastard+21 December 2003 - 08:16--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FatBastard @ 21 December 2003 - 08:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-balamm@21 December 2003 - 20:13
But it was all coordinated by the brits of course. Every part of it. You know those kashmirgas and Peshmerga can't do a damn thing without you.
:)

Another anti-British post? Getting to be quite a habit, eh? [/b][/quote]
Reading this forum, it get's easier every day. :)

(Them that don't have an agenda understand this. )
12-23-2003, 10:54 AM
chalice

Agendas aside, I'd've hoped that, through some happy prism, we could view this section of the forum as a vehicle for curiosity.

A great murderer has been caught, perhaps because of the intracasies and Machiavellian politics that JP prefers to skip. In the few days since Saddam's capture we've felt the shockwaves wash through the world. The deals being struck now are the ones that may lead to future war.

That Saddam is in custody is certainly not all that matters. I just find that view blindly utilitarian and not what I've come to expect from JP and Hobbes.

Perhaps we could celebrate the tyrant dethroned in the "Saddam Hussein Captured" thread and ask questions, however impertinent, in this one.
12-23-2003, 12:07 PM
J'Pol

Quote:

Originally posted by chalice@23 December 2003 - 11:54

A great murderer has been caught, perhaps because of the intracasies and Machiavellian politics that JP prefers to skip. In the few days since Saddam's capture we've felt the shockwaves wash through the world. The deals being struck now are the ones that may lead to future war.

That Saddam is in custody is certainly not all that matters. I just find that view blindly utilitarian and not what I've come to expect from JP and Hobbes.

It is exactly because of said plotting that he was caught and indeed it is the discussions and agreements that are struck behind closed doors that will shape the future, war or otherwise. That is how it always has been and always will be.

The rhetoric is for public consumption and nothing more. It is sabre rattling at it's best, simply because people really like it if the goodies wear white hats and the baddies wear black. John Q public has no interest in deals within deals and does not want to know that sometimes we have to take sides with what he perceives to be an enemy. The USA is particularly bad for his. Given that they do not believe they need their allies, heaven forbid they should do secret deals with "enemies".

In short, you are absolutely correct. I can only say that sometimes I get so sick and tired of squabbling and petty nit-picking that I feel like scraping away all of the crap and just saying - That was a good thing that happened - perhaps the sky was an unfortunate shade of grey that day, but I really don't care.
12-23-2003, 03:10 PM
hobbes

Quote:

Originally posted by J'Pol@23 December 2003 - 13:07
In short, you are absolutely correct. I can only say that sometimes I get so sick and tired of squabbling and petty nit-picking that I feel like scraping away all of the crap and just saying - That was a good thing that happened - perhaps the sky was an unfortunate shade of grey that day, but I really don't care.

Yes, my impression was that the thread was started simply to put a pebble in someones shoe. I have nothing to add to JPauls' comments.
12-23-2003, 06:44 PM
j2k4

Quote:

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+22 December 2003 - 23:25--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 22 December 2003 - 23:25)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

Originally posted by mrlessk@23 December 2003 - 02:21
<!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob

Quote:

@22 December 2003 - 15:33

the whole affair just smacks of the "we saved your ass in world war 2" thinking...

Is this disputable? :mellow:

last christmas my brother bought me a really nice present
i was obviously pleased he bought me the present
however, during the last year, every time he wants me to do something, he says "remember what i got you for christmas" to try and persuade me to help him

:)[/b][/quote]
1-So just what was it the U.S. did for/to Scotland that has you so miffed?

2-Or are you reacting to the constant flow of anti-Scottish rhetoric out of Washington?

3-If it were possible to accurately poll Iraqi citizens, and such a poll revealed that oh, say a mere 65% of Iraqis favored the U.S.'s actions in Iraq, what would your reaction be?

4-Would that 65% be enough to carry the day, in your opinion?

5-Would you question the accuracy of such a poll?

6-What if it were conducted by the (World-renowned for it's impartiality) BBC?

7-Could you be convinced?

8-Or are you closed-minded?

The time now is 02:02 AM