| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Iraq-Jordan | |
| Sammy was just plain nuts prior to the war | |
| 2004-02-12 | |
| This casts even more doubt on the whole idea of him being responsible for that Lebanese peace envoy. My guess is that Habbush was acting on his own accord (or maybe with the Russians), trying to salvage as much of the regime was possible. A complacent Saddam Hussein was so convinced that war would be averted or that America would mount only a limited bombing campaign that he deployed the Iraqi military to crush domestic uprisings rather than defend against a ground invasion, according to a classified log of interrogations of captured Iraqi leaders and former officers. Mr. Hussein believed that a "casualty averse" White House would order a bombing campaign that Iraq could withstand, according to the secret report, prepared for the Pentagon’s most senior leadership and dated Jan. 26. And the Iraqi Defense Ministry, in a grand miscalculation, believed that any ground offensive would come across the Jordanian border.
Even so, both campaigns scored unexpected successes, the Iraqis revealed during their interrogations. When a wave of calls went out to the private telephone numbers of selected officials inside Iraq, asking them to turn against Mr. Hussein and avoid war, the Arabic speakers making the calls were so fluent that the recipients did not believe the calls were from Americans. Instead, the Iraqis believed the calls were part of a "loyalty test" mounted by Mr. Hussein’s secret services, the officials said during questioning. Afraid of arrest, incarceration, torture and even death, they refused to cooperate. But as a result, the officers limited their calls or stopped using those telephones altogether, hampering their ability to communicate in the critical days before war. The military’s collection and analysis of interrogations was compiled by the Joint Forces Command in a report, "Iraqi Perspectives on O.I.F. Major Combat Operations," using the initials for "Operation Iraqi Freedom," the Bush administration’s name for the war effort. Late Wednesday, the officer in charge of the Joint Forces Command, Adm. Edmund P. Giambastiani Jr., said in a telephone interview that the report was written as part of a "very broad gauge" effort "to study what types of lessons we can gather when we go into combat." Admiral Giambastiani refused to discuss the contents of the report, citing its classification. But he did say the study was unusual for the American military in that it comprehensively compiled the views of an adversary to produce "a dynamic, interactive, real-time diagnosis, versus the usual static post-mortem." He added, "We like finding ground truth." The study details problems with another information operation, and quotes Iraqis saying that the millions of leaflets — carrying statements like "Beware! Do not track or fire on coalition aircraft!" — did not incite desertions. But the leaflets intimidated Iraqi soldiers who realized that American bombers could just as easily drop their payloads on their locations, despite Iraq’s vaunted air defenses, according to the detained officials. Officials said that the Iraqi television broadcast system, and the telephone system linked by wires and fiber-optic cables, were unexpectedly resistant to attack. The leadership in Baghdad believed the United States would mount a long-distance air war, mostly focused in the south because Turkey, north of Iraq, had denied access rights. A bombing campaign could "be absorbed," leaving the government in control, Iraqi officials said during their interrogations. The interrogations were viewed by military officers who received the briefing as validating both the decision to send ground forces from the south to drive swiftly toward Baghdad — what Gen. Tommy R. Franks, the wartime commander, described as a strategy of "speed kills" — and the decision to use small numbers of Special Operations forces in western Iraq instead of large infantry forces in that section of the nation. Despite the broad news media coverage of the American and British buildup in Kuwait, the Iraqi Defense Ministry insisted that Jordan would be the launching pad for the invasion, according to the detainees. That assessment was a wild misinterpretation of a series of Special Operations raids by relatively small numbers of the elite troops in the western desert, which began before the major land force crossed out of Kuwait. The goal of the Special Operations missions was to destroy border posts and blind the Iraqi military in those zones as American and allied commandos hunted for unconventional weapons and missiles and controlled that vast, desolate terrain. Pentagon officials said that the politically charged question of whether Iraq possessed unconventional weapons just before the invasion came up during the many closed-door discussions about the study, but that the report carried a disclaimer that that question was not under review in the study. That job, officials said, was assigned to the Iraq Survey Group, which combined officers from the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the intelligence branches of the armed services, and until recently was under the direction of David A. Kay. Dr. Kay, the former chief C.I.A. weapons inspector, has said that his team learned that no Special Republican Guard units had chemical or biological weapons — but that all of the officers believed that some other Special Republican Guard unit had them. He said it appeared that the Iraqi officers were the victims of a disinformation campaign by Mr. Hussein. Pentagon officials and military officers said their scrutiny of the interrogations had found nothing to contradict Dr. Kay’s statements. | |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #41 muck4doo. The black helicopters are coming tonight. Be ready. |
| Posted by: chainey 2004-2-12 10:40:38 PM |
| #40 "A WARMONGERING MURDERER BY PROXY AS YOU SUPPORT THOSE WHO WAGE WAR." -nice line, I love that shit, gives me a woody. Keep talkin' dirty to me baby!! My job if called upon by our "stupid, evil genius of a c-n-c" is to wage war. Does that make me a murderer by proxy? Or a warmonger? Or Both? Oh well, guess I can live w/that. Just remember antiwar, its because of us warmongering, knuckledragging, neanderthal-rednecks that windbagged pussies like yourself can openly disparage our president on the net or in any open forum for that matter. Enjoy your freedom cake-boy, just don't forget who gives it to you. Listen up son, did you hear that?? Sounds to me like 10 other Rantburgers just called you a dumb-ass. And that's the bottomline........ |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-2-12 8:19:02 PM |
| #39 "ever see a fish walking on dry land?" -sure have, the guy calls himself Michael Moore; a flounder's a fish right? |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-2-12 8:08:02 PM |
| #38 Doesn't really matter to me if wmd there or not. He deserved to fall and he will get a fair trail then a fair execution and all i can say is good riddance to bad rubbish |
| Posted by: djohn66 2004-2-12 3:29:11 PM |
| #37 Once more. There WERE weapons of mass destruction. Saddam Hussein was actively pursuing greater destructive power. The Israelis didn't destroy the Osirak nuclear "research" facility because Hussein was working on nuclear medical techniques. I KNOW there were WMDs. I saw them with my own eyes. I saw the storage sites (exactly identical, down to the width of the "clear" zone around them, to Russian WMD chemical & biological storage sites), I saw the decontamination equipment, and I saw the areas where Hussein tested his little "beauties" - both against the Iranians and against animals (and possibly people - the film wasn't that good). I spent 26 years in the Air Force. Most of that time was spent as an imagery analyst - one of the specialists that looked at all that imagery we took around the world with satellites, SR-71's, U-2's, RF-4Cs, RA-5's, and a hundred other collection platforms. I had a Top Secret codeword clearance, and access to just about everything the US intelligence community had. I don't know who's playing games in Iraq, or why. I do know those weapons existed, and I suspect they continue to exist, somewhere. I'd be willing to bet my next month's retirement check that someone in the current Administration knows EXACTLY where those weapons are. I'd also be willing to bet we've found some of them, but are keeping the truth classified. Why, I have no idea, but I could put forth a few halfway educated guesses. The idiotarian LLL moron trolls on this thread and others know nothing. All they're good for is spewing today's LLL talking points. I have less respect for them than I do any turbantop, and the regulars here know how much regard I have for those... 8^). |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2004-2-12 2:24:06 PM |
| #36 WHAT DO I CONSIDER YOU? A WARMONGERING MURDERER BY PROXY AS YOU SUPPORT THOSE WHO WAGE WAR. listen here troll...it is idiotarians like you who are the murderers-by-proxy. Leftist morons, like yourself, make it safe and comfy for tyrants like Saddam to butcher his own people and those of other nations by the millions, you directly enable them- propping them up with a false construct of sovereignty. Sovereignty does not extend down from a leader, it extends upward from the people. The coalition had every legal right and authority to go in and oust Saddam ....WMD doesn't enter the argument here. If there's blood around here...it's on your hands, troll. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2004-2-12 1:28:08 PM |
| #35 To my Dearest ANTI-WAR and NOTMIKEMOORE: I feel open-minded about discussing Iraq, but the ONE-AND-ONLY argument ever offered is BUSH LIED. Do you have ANYTHING else to offer? And what will you do if WMD are found? Concoct another conspiracy theory? Don't be just a slogan and a bullhorn, it's tired. |
| Posted by: Nonnymus 2004-2-12 11:40:47 AM |
| #34 Muckadoo it was Chaney's fault yes for listening to Bush, he should think for himself but sadly he probably thinks along the same lines as GWB which is sad for all nations.Shipman, Allah is God,doesn't matter what a fool like you thinks. Can the chinese fish walk around for more than five or whatever miles that is can it actually live on dry land all the time,without water? I'll be surprised if it does. In reverse you might swim but could you live without breathing apparel underwater all the time? |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 11:00:51 AM |
| #33 antiwar i like you bro but your mad at the wrong person. it wasnt bushes fault it was chaineys! |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2004-2-12 10:46:49 AM |
| #32 Yes, antiwar, there is a fish which walks on dry land, up to 5(?) miles to find water. A Chinese carp(?) which has been found in the US. This thing is an eating machine and a threat to the local fish. Where have you been? It's been in the papers. |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-2-12 10:44:04 AM |
| #31 Don't be afraid allahateme because There is no god named allah Mohammed was a liar. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-2-12 10:40:10 AM |
| #30 ever see a fish walking on dry land? Yes. http://www.kloognome.com/gallery/album26/abd |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-2-12 10:38:04 AM |
| #29 let's ignore |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 10:35:47 AM |
| #28 Allahhateme(no God doesn't hate you)SADDAM DID NOT HAVE WMD BEFORE THE INVASION WHAT DO I CONSIDER YOU? A WARMONGERING MURDERER BY PROXY AS YOU SUPPORT THOSE WHO WAGE WAR. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 10:27:16 AM |
| #27 A simple mnemonic for NMM and Anti-war to remember, potentially saving them some embarassment down the road: No proof of existence is not the same as proof of no existence. I don't expect them to stay on message if the WMD are found, they will simply scope creep their criticism to any number of more refined criticisms: "There may have been WMD, but not enough to do major damage"; "Saddam didn't know he had them..."...etc. etc. It's hilarious to me that these shitbags will not believe the long-standing assessment of a majority of the free worlds' intelligence agencies, but rather accept, unquestioningly, the assessment of NYT, Washington Post, et al. which changes like the wind blows. |
| Posted by: mjh 2004-2-12 10:14:38 AM |
| #26 Antiwar you are such a mindless piece of shit. Do you deny that every, EVERY intelligence agency in the world including France, Germany and Russia, all said he had wmd? Were they in on this big "lie"? Answer me you little toad. Or are you really that fucking stupid? How is it possible to be so brainless and continue to live? Mommy and daddy must spend a lot of time protecting you from yourself. Do the world a favor, just go away. This site is for grownups to debate. Not for mindless little children to blather on. |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2004-2-12 10:04:07 AM |
| #25 "while it's true Saddam gassed the Kurds and Iranians back in the 1980's he did not have any wmds prior to operation coalition crap" Ummmm... so when exactly did he get rid of them? |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-12 10:01:45 AM |
| #24 LMAO, of yeah the world would be SO MUCH better without GWB, right? But Saddam, Khomenai, Arafat, Assad, Kim, Mugabe, Castro and Chavez (to name a few) make the world so much better! Seriously, I see it as one of 3 possibilities for leftist. Thet are either 1) incredibly stupid 2) have lost their moral compass and want leftist to win so bad they've sided with the evil in the world because they promise to support that happening or 3) they are evil themselves and hiding behind the leftist mantra to hide their true intentions. |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-12 10:00:21 AM |
| #23 Lil Dimmy while it's true Saddam gassed the Kurds and Iranians back in the 1980's he did not have any wmds prior to operation coalition crap. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 9:57:46 AM |
| #22 Oh, and the Iranians lied too. |
| Posted by: Lil Dhimmi 2004-2-12 9:44:40 AM |
| #21 Don't forget that those films of the dead Kurds were lies too. The chemical weapons attacks never happened. Nope. |
| Posted by: Lil Dhimmi 2004-2-12 9:42:46 AM |
| #20 The world would be better if GWB was not president hopefully he will not rig another election and America hopefully will get a good president. Do you know that GWB said the human and the fish can coexist peacefully;ever see a fish walking on dry land? |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 9:33:46 AM |
| #19 Of course there were WMDs in Iraq. I'm not sure where they are now, but it's obvious they were there since HE USED THEM... sheesh this isn't very complicated. Now they could be buried in the desert somewhere, he could have moved them to another country or he really might have destroyed them (which would be odd since... why would he destroy them but then refuse to allow the UN to see his documentation/proof of destruction... I mean why destroy them in the first place to appease the world but then refuse to prove to the world that you did it?!?). I hope we find them because it's pretty dangerous to have them floating around out there but in terms of the cause for war it is irrelevent to me. All I care about is that a wealthy autocratic regime that was a sworn enemy of the US has been toppled and in the process we've given hope to 25 million people in Iraq and 10s of millions more in the region. The world will be a far better place without Saddam and we have GWB to thank for it. It will be an even better place once we get rid of Khomenai and Kim... but all in due time. |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-2-12 9:20:38 AM |
| #18 You are as idiotic as the president you voted for. You cannot find what does not exist.Bush has a good and evil side like anyone. He used his evil side to lie and invade Iraq. Your right about Blair lied,he certainly did. NO WMDS IN IRAQ. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 8:57:03 AM |
| #17 Ah, Scott Ritter. As the head of UNSCOM, Richard Butler, put it in September 2002: "Until the day he left UNSCOM, Scott was robustly advising me, in writing -- you know, the papers are out there to prove it -- that Iraq continued to retain illegal weapons. He begged me to authorize him to go in and do what he called "kick in the doors and find those weapons." Sometimes, I authorized him to lead inspections; sometimes I rejected his proposals because, quite frankly, they were a little bit off the wall. Now, his advice to me then, on the basis of good evidence which I knew, was that Iraq continued to retain illegal weapons. He resigned. A few months later, he crossed the road and for some reason -- I don't know why, I am not a psychoanalyst -- but he crossed the road and started to tell the world that there were no such weapons. So I put it to you this way. Either he was misleading me when he worked for me, or he began to mislead the world's public later. Now, I know which one it is. He was not misleading me, rather, he is now misleading the world's public. And I find that sad, wrong, and frankly, a touch dangerous." |
| Posted by: Nonnymus 2004-2-12 8:53:47 AM |
| #16 OK let's pretend they were all lying (including Clinton). So they ALL knew YEARS beforehand that nothing would be found. CIA lied. Blair lied. Brit intel LIED. Saddam's brother-in-law LIED. Congressmen LIED. Thousands of people across the world were in on the big LIE. Everyone knew that this would turn into BUSH LIED forever. Why not just plant some evidence? This is EVIL BUSH we're talking about, right? Smart enough LIE the world into war, but too dumb to 'find' some weapons? (p.s. why was the left too stupid to expose the lies BEFORE the war? They had a YEAR. Even France never said there were no WMD, only that it wasn't worth war) |
| Posted by: Nonnymus 2004-2-12 8:44:26 AM |
| #15 B if you want a quote look yourself.I have already given what Scott Ritter said. Why are you so intent on believing that Saddam did have wmd? When it's obvious he did not. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 8:41:46 AM |
| #14 Antiwar - my $20 bet is still open. It should be so easy for you to find me a quote. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 8:24:18 AM |
| #13 SYRIA????? how the bloody hell did he do that???? How would Saddam have moved a whole arsenal into another country in secret. You dogs are seriously braincramped.There were (before the villainous invasion)NO WMD. You are THE STUPID DUPES OF A STUPID PRESIDENT |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 8:18:45 AM |
| #12 I'm sure being as honest as NMM and antiwar are, I'm sure they were just as against Clinton's Desert Fox and policy of regime change in Iraq as they are now that Bush has followed through on it. /sarcasm off |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2004-2-12 7:37:19 AM |
| #11 NMM - have you seen my $20 bet? With the company you keep and your constant mantra of Bush lied - you should be able to provide me a quote!! For Fred...of course. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 7:34:54 AM |
| #10 If any of the communal brain crew not including me or nmm know (as you seem so convinced) where Saddam hid his arsenal please inform. Syria. Aren't you paying attention? |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2004-2-12 7:24:46 AM |
| #9 Mr. Hussein believed that a "casualty averse" White House would order a bombing campaign that Iraq could withstand I wonder how he got that idea. Maybe it was the four or five repetitions of the same thing from Clinton? |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-2-12 7:11:51 AM |
| #8 YES!!!!! :-) to nmm for his/her insight on wmd. If any of the communal brain crew not including me or nmm know (as you seem so convinced) where Saddam hid his arsenal please inform. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-2-12 5:42:53 AM |
| #7 Or maybe the leftists unwittingly helped by lulling Saddam into a false sense of security. Way to go No Blood for Oiiiill-Creeps! Way to go Chirac! It's fun letting our remaining enemies know that listening to the Left and the Old Europeans is liable to get you in serious trouble. |
| Posted by: Tokyo Taro 2004-2-12 5:32:20 AM |
| #6 NMM: LIke you give a F*** about the families of soldiers. Or the Iraqi people. Or the truth. Or anything except your own irrelvance which you continue to demostrate quite effectively. |
| Posted by: Ben 2004-2-12 5:20:47 AM |
| #5 The emerging picture of Saddam as surrounded by scared shitless syncophants, first put out into the mainstream by Ken Pollock in the Threatening Storm, is confirmed in this story and underscores a very, very important matter. He confirms that the leftists give hope to tyrants. Just like they did to the North Vietnamese. That they are, de facto, on the side of tyrants. No one was going to tell the Saddam the truth and live. But there's more too. Saddam thought we were weak, without the will to take casualties. His model Americans are leftists like the overwrought poster here. The underminers. The whiners. The ones who would rather that millions are murdered than do anything about it. He confirms that the leftists give tyrants hope. Just like they did for the North Vietnamese. |
| Posted by: RMcLeod 2004-2-12 3:41:30 AM |
| #4 OT, but I am too tired to link this report of troops massing in Yemen, against Saudi "occupation" of parts of Yemen. Who'll send suicide-boomers, first? http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?i=711&p=front&a=1 Who's up for posting this? |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-2-12 3:36:46 AM |
| #3 And still Bush, Condi, Cheney and worst of all--Powell lied through their teeth about the WMD's which still have not been found--I bet 500 American soldier's families want to know what was up with that.. |
| Posted by: NotMike Moore 2004-2-12 2:49:07 AM |
| #2 So Saddam didn't think we'd do it. The ME didn't think we'd do it. And don't forget, we're cowards, but we're staying. If that memo is recent, after 2-1/2 years of experience w/the US, they still haven't learned. |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-2-12 2:22:34 AM |
| #1 They thought the invasion would be from Jordan!? Good grief. |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2004-2-12 2:05:03 AM |