What Saddam was really thinking: TIME

[Cowperson]

TIME Magazine with a portrait of Saddam in the last years of his regime.

The article attempts to answer the enduring riddle coming out of the Iraq conflict - how to reconcile the fact Iraq had zero WMD but Saddam refused to confirm that fact to save himself.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...00.html?cnn=yes

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

My gut feeling is that he simply didn't know that his country didn't have them any longer.

Its posible that his WMD program was making little or no progess but nobody wanted to report failure to him for fear of the bullet or the noose.

The reports that he received were probably greatly positive and greatly exagerated.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I have not read the article, but here is what I know and feel to be true.

Saddam Hussein had an immeasurably large ego. He saw himself as the lynchpin to the MIddle East and its most important player. He, like President Bush, did not realize that he was just another small fish in a big pond. Now Hussein liked to keep up appreanaces that he was the BIG fish in the Middle East and liked to be the guy that could keep America off balance and be seen as a bit of a strong leader for that reason. He knew his weapons were destroyed and that is why he put up this facade of playing cat and mouse with the inspectors. It was a game and one that would buy him credability in the Arab world. Unfortunately by doing so he built up this facade that he was also hiding something that he was still a serious threat. Even though he was a toothless lion he still had the mane and could roar, which scared the other animals enough to respect him.

Hussein screwed up by p*ssing in Bush's pool and not believing that Bush would do the most assinine thing possible, and invade Iraq. Hussein's sabre rattling was just that. Sabre rattling... at a gun fight. He had a sabre, he rattled it, but he had no other weapon and he was staring down the barrel of a several loaded shot guns. Hussein looked like a tough guy right until the very end (even the stories of him hiding in a super secret bunker, instead of a hole in someone's back yard, made him look powerful) and that is what Saddam wanted the most. To be perceived as a tough guy and a great leader in the MIddle East. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Saddam's thoughts, "Ditka, Bears, Ditka, Sausage, Ditka, Ditka, Ditka". :wacko:

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 10 2004, 05:04 PM
I have not read the article, but here is what I know and feel to be true.

Saddam Hussein had an immeasurably large ego. He saw himself as the lynchpin to the MIddle East and its most important player. He, like President Bush, did not realize that he was just another small fish in a big pond. Now Hussein liked to keep up appreanaces that he was the BIG fish in the Middle East and liked to be the guy that could keep America off balance and be seen as a bit of a strong leader for that reason. He knew his weapons were destroyed and that is why he put up this facade of playing cat and mouse with the inspectors. It was a game and one that would buy him credability in the Arab world. Unfortunately by doing so he built up this facade that he was also hiding something that he was still a serious threat. Even though he was a toothless lion he still had the mane and could roar, which scared the other animals enough to respect him.

Hussein screwed up by p*ssing in Bush's pool and not believing that Bush would do the most assinine thing possible, and invade Iraq. Hussein's sabre rattling was just that. Sabre rattling... at a gun fight. He had a sabre, he rattled it, but he had no other weapon and he was staring down the barrel of a several loaded shot guns. Hussein looked like a tough guy right until the very end (even the stories of him hiding in a super secret bunker, instead of a hole in someone's back yard, made him look powerful) and that is what Saddam wanted the most. To be perceived as a tough guy and a great leader in the MIddle East. Nothing more, nothing less.

I more or less agree, but I think his sabre rattling was as much out of necessity as it was out of ego

If Hussein gave up all his cards and told his neighbours that he had nothing, it would have only been a matter of time until parts of Iraq were annexed. It's a rough region where he had to look tough. This is why the cowboy diplomacy was doomed to failure from the beginning. Hussein couldn't do things Bush's way without putting his country in an equally dangerous position.

[Cowperson]

Hussein couldn't do things Bush's way without putting his country in an equally dangerous position.

Boo hoo.

The only reason he was worried about Iran was because he invaded it twenty years before and knew they weren't going to forget it. Why feel sorry for him?

It was the United Nations, via Resolution 1441, which promised "grave consequences" and escalated pressure for compliance for United Nations WMD resolutions 12 years old.

It was the UN, the global community, applying the pressure on Saddam to fully disclose whether or not he had anything.

And Saddam brought that UN attention on himself.

He could have complied with UN weapons inspectors in 1991, used oil money to rebuild a massive, modern army and a fairly wealthy society that would have been fairly impervious to any threat from Iran.

The Americans probably would have sold him the tanks and guns too given they're not too excited about Iran themselves.

Instead, Saddam comes across as just another in a long line of dictators who piled up too many enemies and wasn't bright enough to keep all the balls in the air at once.

Cowperson

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Oct 10 2004, 11:04 AM
Hussein looked like a tough guy right until the very end (even the stories of him hiding in a super secret bunker, instead of a hole in someone's back yard, made him look powerful) and that is what Saddam wanted the most. To be perceived as a tough guy and a great leader in the MIddle East. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's another thing I don't get about all this. Remember before the war there was all this talk of supersecret underground palaces that he could live in for years. They had segments on the news about work some German company had done on tunnels, lots of speculation and "experts" making him out to be some sort of Bond villain with an underground lair, directing the war and threatening the world, that kind of thing.

What, umm, happened to all that stuff? Once the war started, I don't remember hearing anything about it. Saddam was found in hole in the yard, his sons were killed in some guy's condo, everyone else got caught or turned themselves in. Was it all just a figment of someone's imagination (or even mine)?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

You must remember that America gets things done through fear mongering. I think this all turned out to be one of the greatest periods of fear mongering the world has ever seen. Hussein was a toothless lion. The military said it and felt it was a waste of time to make a move on him. Stability had been attained. Only Fear Mongering made the invasion a reality.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Oct 10 2004, 08:36 PM
Boo hoo.

The only reason he was worried about Iran was because he invaded it twenty years before and knew they weren't going to forget it. Why feel sorry for him?

Who said I feel sorry for him? I'm speaking from a position of logic.

It was just idiotic diplomacy. If Bush really wanted to find a peaceful resolution, he would have understood the situation and had been more patient instead of turining it into a situation where Hussein couldn't comply with the demands.

Even after the UN inspectors claimed they were making progress, Bush then changed his demands to include exile for Hussein. After that, why would anyone comply with the demands? It was obvious that Bush was going to get his war no matter what Saddam Hussein did.

BTW, Iraq invaded Iran at the urging of, and with the support of the U.S. They have a lot of blame in that war too.

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction+Oct 10 2004, 09:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamesAddiction @ Oct 10 2004, 09:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Oct 10 2004, 08:36 PM
Boo hoo.

The only reason he was worried about Iran was because he invaded it twenty years before and knew they weren't going to forget it. Why feel sorry for him?

Who said I feel sorry for him? I'm speaking from a position of logic.

It was just idiotic diplomacy. If Bush really wanted to find a peaceful resolution, he would have understood the situation and had been more patient instead of turining it into a situation where Hussein couldn't comply with the demands.

Even after the UN inspectors claimed they were making progress, Bush then changed his demands to include exile for Hussein. After that, why would anyone comply with the demands? It was obvious that Bush was going to get his war no matter what Saddam Hussein did.

BTW, Iraq invaded Iran at the urging of, and with the support of the U.S. They have a lot of blame in that war too. [/b][/quote]
If Bush really wanted to find a peaceful resolution, he would have understood the situation and had been more patient instead of turining it into a situation where Hussein couldn't comply with the demands.

Understood what?

In the months leading into the conflict, the UN passed a resolution which escalated the situation and promised "grave consequences" if he failed to comply. We can argue if that meant outright war but obviously the clock on 12 years of sanctions was getting closer to midnight by international agreement. Saddam NEVER complied and NEVER intended to. The Duelfer Report, which torched the Bush WMD argument this week, ALSO makes that clear.

You're making excuses for a guy who never complied and never intended to comply.

There's certainly a debate as to whether or not "grave consequences" meant a green light for war or even if it was the right thing to do, but blaming everyone else for the situation Saddam put himself in doesn't wash.

He was the architect of his own demise, a guy who had used WMD, started two wars and who felt he could stay alive only by at least maintaining a myth he had WMD and would use it.

Not exactly the definition of a victim!!

BTW, Iraq invaded Iran at the urging of, and with the support of the U.S. They have a lot of blame in that war too.

As the war broke out, an unnamed State Department official, with a quote often used by left wing publications to beat America to death with:

"We don't give a damn as long as the Iran-Iraq carnage does not affect our allies in the region or alter the balance of power."<

At the moment Saddam crossed the border into Iran, I believe he was armed entirely by the Soviets and to some extent, France, as was the common practice of many Arab mideast regimes at the time. In the months leading into the conflict, Jimmy Carter's man Zbignew Brezinzki (sp), in line with The Carter Doctrine, had said the USA had no reason to view Iraq as an kind of adversary (unlike Iran) which might be construed as pushing a button somewhere. The USA had no diplomatic relations with Iraq/Iran at the time.

Once it got going, the USA and the Soviets saw the opportunities to mutually antagonize and profit, both sides keeping the two combatants constantly at war for almost a decade, strengthening one when the other got strong enough to win.

Implying the USA started that war is an incredible stretch. I'm sure they were clapping their hands in delight but it would be akin to me saying: "I wish FlamesAddiction would quit this thread." I would be delighted if you did, but if you take that action its entirely up to you, not me. :P

Cowperson