Saddam's Address

[cj]

Although it was virtually impossible to understand any of the translators on the 5 different news channels this was broadcast live to (that i saw anyway), the general message was pretty clear ...

he called for the soldiers to fight harder and for the people to stand up and fight the 'evil enemy' ... not good considering how many troops are right in the middle of iraq.

the biggest threat to the coalition might end up being the civilians, angry people protecting their homeland because their great leader told them they would earn their place with god if they kill an evil westerner.

:angry:

[-= JR =-]

Before Alex comes along to warn again of massive bloodshed, the impending implosion of the Islamic world into war and Middle East in to Anarchy and violence as the result of what may be "the bloodiest war in 50 years" as he called it on Netpond... i think its right to point out that

1) he never lost the first war. he only lost it on paper. he only lost some hardware.
2) the rhetoric was the same during Desert Storm as his forces were decimated. "Victory" was always going to be theirs against "the great satan". He continued that for 12 years after Desert Storm as well... nothing new.

I think the success or failure of Saddam Hussein will depend only on Coalition resolve to remove him from power. I doubt that Iraqi resistence is going to be a factor in the Coalitions ability to take out leadership targets, military targets, destroying his regime, as well as his ability to command and lead his government and military.

What follows the regime of Saddam Hussein at the very least, will be a regime that knows that absolute destruction awaits them should they choose the same path.

A regime that knows that 40 Satellite Guided Cruise Missiles... many fired from submarines can seek them out and find them at any hour of the night, without warning... wherever they are sleeping and they cannot hide.



Last edited by -= JR =- at Mar 24 2003, 04:10 AM

[cj]

I think the success or failure of Saddam Hussein will depend only on International resolve to remove him from power.

yes, exactly ...

I doubt that Iraqi resistence is going to be a factor in the Coalitions ability to take out leadership targets, military targets, destroying his regime, as well as his ability to command and lead his government and military.

maybe not, but if american soldiers have to kill civilians in a mass way to achieve the objective of this war, sad-dam-mad-man will have a powerful propaganda campaign to lose the usa more international support. And like you said, this war depends entirely on how the rest of the world decides to interpret these actions and how they act.

how can you underestimate the will of these people?

they will stand in front of tanks so they will die as hero's, and the footage will show how the tanks ran over innocent civilian ... oh hang on, i'm thinking of a movie

:P

[voodooman]

If we could find bio and chem weapons somewhere in Iraq, it would certainly change the way we are going about this war.

Lets pray that the compound they found does indeed contain
weapons of mass destruction.

It was reported that some of the high ranking Iraqi officals
that surrendered, they found Cipro on them.

[The Other Steve]

This report appeared on-line yesterday

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s813805.htm

it's interesting when you take it in context with the fighting that is still going on in towns that the coalition claimed had been captured.

I'm afraid that the hearts and minds war was lost before it even started :(

[urb]

Main objective is to remove Saddam Hussein from power and ensure that some other evil dictator does not take his place.

If I was Bush, I would.....

1) Remove Saddam Hussein from power.
2) Install democracy in Iraq.
3) Get the fuck out of there.

:rokk:

[Almighty Colin]

Saddam is confident. Always. Have heard some interesting interviews with defectors that were close to him. He hardly ever receives bad news. He often kills the messenger. A typical Q and A would go like this.

"Are we doing well"?

"Yessir. Everyone is fighting bravely. They love you."

Hard not to remain confident in that self-created atmosphere.

My opinion of what Saddam thinks and plans hasn't waivered one bit since this has started.

1. Defend Baghdad.
2. Force as many coalition casualties as possible
3. He believes the Americans won't fight if they get bloodied enough (He thought that in Gulf War I anyway. I would assume he still thinks that).
4. We'll have to pull out. He'll survive. he'll build WMD. He'll destroy Israel.

That is Saddam.

Strategically it would seem better to place the entire Republican Guard inside of Baghdad/Tikrit but someone that is that obsessed with his personal security I would assume thinks that is too dangerous (coup).

Before Gulf War I, Saddam said that the Americans had air power but that air power had never won a war before. He sees his good points, none of his bad ones, and has continually underestimated his enemies (Israel, US).

It seems that:
Coalition plan has gone exactly according to his plan.
Saddam's plan has gone according to plan.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by -= JR =-@Mar 24 2003, 04:05 AM
Before Alex comes along to warn again of massive bloodshed, the impending implosion of the Islamic world into war and Middle East in to Anarchy and violence as the result of what may be "the bloodiest war in 50 years"
Sounds like the Middle East to me. I don't think that will change. We may be delaying the inevitable. Someday a nuke will hit Tel Aviv.

"Peace in the Middle East" is a dream that will not happen. How can there be peace when every country in the region has leaders that have promised the destruction of Israel? No one WANTS peace - as JR has pointed out many times before. You have guys like Arafat that say they want "peace with Israel" and then make speeches saying the only possible outcome must be the eventual destruction of Israel. Arafat has been well-supported by regional nations, especially Iraq.

Best hope is to keep actively tilting the power structure in The Middle East weakening and strengthening countries so they fight each other but never decisively .. unless we succumb to the Arab doctrine that Israel must and will be destroyed.

The next 50 years probably will be an extremely bloody period in the Middle East but nothing we do can make it worse than it's going to be.

Many Iraqis will cheer us in a few weeks but hate us in a year. Completely expected. I think Iraq will be worse off than if we hadn't gone in there. I also think it would be worse off if we didn't go in there. Either way, Iraq will be worse. Iraqi's either get more Saddam or the Middle East gets further destablized. One would think the Kurd/Sunni/Shiite problem in Iraq will be a hotpoint. Iraq, with a large shiite population might tilt towards Islamism rather than Arabism and change the power-structure of the Middle East.

I have many doubts that WE can make the Middle East better. I think we can try and make the Middle East BETTER FOR US. The question for me is what's better for US. I vote "No Saddam".

Our best hope is a constitutional democracy in Iraq. Can it work? No idea. Japan's constitution seems to have worked to the benefit of the West.



Last edited by Colin at Mar 24 2003, 07:44 AM

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by urb@Mar 24 2003, 05:05 AM
Main objective is to remove Saddam Hussein from power and ensure that some other evil dictator does not take his place.

If I was Bush, I would.....

1) Remove Saddam Hussein from power.
2) Install democracy in Iraq.
3) Get the fuck out of there.

:rokk:
Arab leaders in the Middle East are more pro-US than their citizens. I think we'd be better off with a tempered dictatorship than a democracy. Hard to imagine that shiites with voting power would do anything but vote for anti-US and anti-Israeli leaders.

Anyway, we'll try and install a democracy and hope it works out ok. Maybe they'll stick to the new constitution -- whatever it may be.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by The Other Steve@Mar 24 2003, 04:36 AM
This report appeared on-line yesterday

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s813805.htm

it's interesting when you take it in context with the fighting that is still going on in towns that the coalition claimed had been captured.

I'm afraid that the hearts and minds war was lost before it even started :(
I've seen dozens of interviews with Iraqi exiles with the exact opposite view.

[Mike AI]

The reason some Iraqis are fighting more is that Saddam learned from the first war, where there were many thousands of soldiers giving up. Now Saddam has put his special troops in all units. So it is like the Russian COmmunist did with their "political officers" who would put a bullet in you if you even looked like you would run, or try to surrender.

Another issue we are having is that when we came in 1991, we DID ambandon those people... and when we left, thousands were masacred by Saddam. So that is why many are holding back judgement, and not getting excited until they know we are staying in Iraq for good - or at least ovethrowing Saddam completely.

A final issue is that many of the people who were part of the regime, those who benefited, and who opressed their people - they know they have no where to go and will not be part of the future New Iraq. So its a do or die thng for them.

This is the only way you can explain 40 lightly armed men attacking armoured units - it is SUICIDE.... I beleive Rumsfield call these guys Dead Enders.

As far as Saddam's speech - I still think it was pre-recorded, before the conflict started. One of the units Saddam praised was one that gave up very soon into the war. Saddam and his top people are MASTERS of propaganda....

From what I understand we have been trying to not go in blasting, that we have been trying to be humane, and give people a chance to surrender.... thus we are putting a burden on our troops, and putting them at a higher risk. It is been said that we may be changing this forward stance, since IRaqis are using it against us. I hope we change our rules of engagement. Instead of trying to talk IRaqis out of buildings, or firing small arms fire, trying to get them to get out because we do not want to cause much damage - I think we need to start calling in the 2,000 lb bombs.

We need to use ALL of our advantages, and not hold back anymore....

[Mike AI]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/889289_asp.htm?0cv=CB10

And when he cited several units and commanders, saluting them “for their heroic feats in the battlefield,” he named the commander of the 11th Iraqi Brigade in Basra, who surrendered along with many of his troops in the early hours of the war. That prompted officials at the allied Central Command in Qatar to conclude that the tape was likely recorded before the beginning of the hostilities.

[Mutt]

It's looking to me like Bush cannot fight this war with one arm tied
behind his back trying to please everybody. Playing right into this bastard's hands and troops will die because of it.

Any war worth fighting is a war worth winning - I think that is a famous quote, meaning if you ain't there to win you shouldn't be there at all.

Hussein is worth going to war against so take the gloves off and win it.
IF he puts civilians in harm's way, too bad, their blood is on his hands, not America's.

I bought Bush's pitch that the people of Iraq want to be liberated and will rejoice - uh..............we're not seeing much rejoicing even in the cities secured by American troops. That would have been nice to see. I heard what Mike said, that the people there felt burned the last time by the U.S., i've heard Iraqi citizens have asked the soldiers if the Americans are going to do what they did the last time. So even the Iraqis who hate Hussein aren't so excited by the war, guess they don't want to get their hopes up too much.

Shock and Awe campaign doesn't seem to have worked - it was supposed to cause so much confusion, be so overwhelming that Hussein's key military guys would turn against him and surrender. Haven't seen much of that.

Maybe it's just because yesterday was so bad for American troops but man if everybody was being honest the word 'VIETNAM' had to have crossed your mind. I even hear Hackworth invoke Vietnam on CNN.
And that is scary.

[Mike AI]

Mutt his is not going to be another Vietnam....

We have become very spoiled in recent years that war is something we can do from a distance, and not suffer any casualties. The fact is, war is war. Taking over an entire country is a difficult proposition. We have made AMAZING strides in Iraq. Our troops have gone further in 72 hours into enemy territory then any force EVER in history.

While we all hate casualties, they are a part of war. The numbers we are seeing are LOW. The press, with the aid of the White House - had led Americans to beleive this was going to be a cake walk, like the first war. It is not the same war. Saddam and his people are not stupid, they learned lessons from 10 years ago.

We have to understand there will be setbacks in war, and we may suffer casualties and POWs, more then in anywar since Vietnam. But we will prevail, Saddam's regime will be expelled.

We as a nation have become weak minded in many ways, it is frustrating.... I wonder what our grandparents would have done if they had the same attitudes during WWII.

I just hope the President understand this, and lets our military take the gloves off.... the sooner we get the war over, the less casualties we will have in the long term.

This war will probably not be over in days, or even weeks, but it will end on our terms and in victory.

[Rox]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Mar 24 2003, 11:49 AM
I just hope the President understand this, and lets our military take the gloves off.... the sooner we get the war over, the less casualties we will have in the long term.
I couldn't agree more.

How's that for Shock & Awe, Mike? :awinky:

[Mike AI]

I like it Rox. I think you should be advising the President!

The thing is, politically it would be nice not to blow everything up, to leave as much intact, and not to touch one single civilian. However, there will be not POLITICAL peace if we do not win the war first. One follows the other.

We have tried it the nice way, now its time to unleash the soldiers and let the do what they do best - break things and kill people.

I heard a military commentator who thinks Bush is going to give the nice way a few more days.... personally I think we have given to many as it is.

[ulfie]

I watched Saddam's "historic" canned speech last night. It's obvious it was taped. As mike said, he was saluting people that had already surrendered. I listened very closely to find one thing that could establish the filming was live or at least recent and never did find one. He never mentioned the POW's which was a major thing for me. He SURELY would have gloated about that. As far as I'm concerned this could have been taped a year ago. I'm starting to believe he may be dead or seriously injured. If he's dead though, why keep him alive in the media? Who knows?

[Raven]

I heard that speech, too, Ulfie.

So, who thinks Saddam is still alive?

[Mike AI]

I think Saddam may be alive, but there is a good chance he is wounded somehow. Even if it was not life threatening, he may be injured and not wanting to show his face on TV.

[Rox]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Mar 24 2003, 12:08 PM
I like it Rox. I think you should be advising the President!
HAHAHAHA wouldn't that be something? I'll tell ya one thing, he'd certainly be pronouncing "nuclear" properly, or I'd have to do VERY painful things to him!


The thing is, politically it would be nice not to blow everything up, to leave as much intact, and not to touch one single civilian. However, there will be not POLITICAL peace if we do not win the war first. One follows the other.

We have tried it the nice way, now its time to unleash the soldiers and let the do what they do best - break things and kill people.

I heard a military commentator who thinks Bush is going to give the nice way a few more days.... personally I think we have given to many as it is.

Yeah... although it's true I would rather we hadn't gone in right now, and the way we went about going in, I have to agree that trying to be "nice" isn't something we should be doing for any extended period of time. We're in there, and we know the other side won't be following any rules that even come close to what's considered honorable in a military engagement, so fuck it, we do what we have to, while still keeping the safety of civilians in mind -- but not so much that it keeps us from obtaining the win.

Gawd, I can't believe I'm saying that... Well, yes I can... I'm probably actually more hawk than dove when all's said and done.

[Mike AI]

Rox, no one wants war. One thing that is being reenforced is that war is a bad thing, on all sided. The past few wars were stand off wars, so we as a people might have forgotten that its a serious matter - one we should not get into easily, but once we do we should put everything into it so it takes a short time.

I am concerned that we may have underestimated the resolve of the Iraqs ( realisticly they are being forced to fight by saddams enforcers). I hope we have enough HEAVY equipment, that is the M1A1 main battle tank.

If we have to hold up outside Baghdad, while we reinforce our posistions, bringing in more troops - securing supply lines - then that is what we have to do.

But I think we have some things up our sleeves and our commanders are smart people....

[Rox]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Mar 24 2003, 02:02 PM
I am concerned that we may have underestimated the resolve of the Iraqs ( realisticly they are being forced to fight by saddams enforcers). I hope we have enough HEAVY equipment, that is the M1A1 main battle tank.

If we have to hold up outside Baghdad, while we reinforce our posistions, bringing in more troops - securing supply lines - then that is what we have to do.

But I think we have some things up our sleeves and our commanders are smart people....
Make no mistake, I have EVERY confidence in our military might -- both our personnel and our war machines, and I know we'll win -- it's what we do best. I pray every day (though that's not really the right word, since I'm an atheist LOL) that it'll happen quickly and we'll lose as few fighting men & women as humanly possible. They are nothing short of heroic, and my heart fills with pride for what they're doing; and breaks in anguish with every report I see that says one or more of them has been hurt, killed or captured. I've spent a LOT of time this past week with tears in my eyes and finding it difficult to breathe around the lump in my throat -- both in sadness and in gratitude and pride.

My suspicion and distaste for motive and action is pretty much reserved for the "suits," just like in the workaday world. :P

[Almighty Colin]

Since we're speculating, I think Saddam's alive AND Injured.