Do they need to kill Saddam?

Why not just kill one of his doubles, and then show that body as Saddam, then discredit any reports of his being alive and wait for him to show himself as he tries to prove he is still alive.

It would work....

Wouldn't it?

I have a feeling that the real Saddam is already dead, which is likely a negative. They DONT want him dead, not right now.

We still need a boogeyman to give us a reason to still be there.

What I see coming in the near future on this subject is this:

We kill his "sons" (who have likely been dead since the war)

"Saddam" (Also dead since the war) takes revenge on the US with a mass casualty attack using WMD (likely with US serial numbers on them)

The US is in an uproar, Bush is vindicated, there is still a threat, no chance of US forces coming home.

"Saddam" shows up in Iran (most likely), giving us an excuse to roll into Iran and take the next largest player in OPEC.

Well they gotta find the rotweiler first, i think that will be a fruitless effort anyway they havnt found Bin Laden
yet.

Those in Saddam's inner circle are more of an embarrassment to the Bush administration alive then dead. Shoot first, ask no questions later, is clearly the established policy.

The plausibility of any strategy involving Saddam Hussein must depend on the position you adopt about this war's purpose.

I don't believe it has much to do with Saddam at all, but if political gain is one motive involving Hussein, then I don't think 'whack a mole' and pretending to get him then waiting for him to surface is the easiest stratagem, only because it is more deception and lies, which does nothing for this terminally ill administration. What else is a 'lure'?

Finding Hussein is more likely than finding WMDs in Iraq. But it's not material, except to card collectors...

How about getting law and order restored there, and abandoning the overarching agenda?

How about getting law and order restored there, and abandoning the overarching agenda? Posted by Masked Avatar

Not in the chips. The primary goal at the moment is to dig in and convert Iraq into a forward deployment base for the next action... likely against Iran.

Originally posted by dragonrider
I have a feeling that the real Saddam is already dead, which is likely a negative. They DONT want him dead, not right now.

We still need a boogeyman to give us a reason to still be there.

What I see coming in the near future on this subject is this:

We kill his "sons" (who have likely been dead since the war)

"Saddam" (Also dead since the war) takes revenge on the US with a mass casualty attack using WMD (likely with US serial numbers on them)

The US is in an uproar, Bush is vindicated, there is still a threat, no chance of US forces coming home.

"Saddam" shows up in Iran (most likely), giving us an excuse to roll into Iran and take the next largest player in OPEC.

Thats quite a scenario there DR. Although I feel you may be right. I fear that another attack may be coming. Only this time it will be much larger than 9/11. I mean Bush needs another excuse to keep the war going now that many americans are starting to realize that they were lied to.

Agree with MA if they "take out" a doble of Saddam and claim it is him then when they nab the man himself what
would they say? they will be telling porkies wont they?

dr

I agree with you about how the chips fall.

Learning from previous wars, eventually a unified enemy comes in to obliterate the aggressor.

Not a pleasant thought.

Thats quite a scenario there DR. Although I feel you may be right. I fear that another attack may be coming. Only this time it will be much larger than 9/11. I mean Bush needs another excuse to keep the war going now that many americans are starting to realize that they were lied to. Posted by Ocelot

My point exactly! Things are falling apart for Bush, which is the PERFECT time for another attack to stir up the massive patriotic feelings, and give justification to us staying in Iraq, probably to roll into Iran, and most likely to really expand the Patriot Act.

Originally posted by dragonrider
How about getting law and order restored there, and abandoning the overarching agenda? Posted by Masked Avatar

Not in the chips. The primary goal at the moment is to dig in and convert Iraq into a forward deployment base for the next action... likely against Iran.

So your saying that Iraq=Us soil? thats crazy their primary reason fro invading Iraq was to disarm Saddam and his WMD, and liberating the Iraqi ppl they have achieved the disarming Saddam part but by staying in Iraq they are just making the Iraqi ppl pissed off.

I haven't mentioned it here, but I presume everyone has played the 'Gulf War 2' Shockwave game out.

We are truly only at Step One.

Blair has not even said to Bush yet... 'errr... Mr President... you didn't say anything about Iraq'.

No Israeli involvement yet.

The 20 other countries are not even jostling for position yet.

No chemical or nuclear strikes yet.

Originally posted by dragonrider
Thats quite a scenario there DR. Although I feel you may be right. I fear that another attack may be coming. Only this time it will be much larger than 9/11. I mean Bush needs another excuse to keep the war going now that many americans are starting to realize that they were lied to. Posted by Ocelot

My point exactly! Things are falling apart for Bush, which is the PERFECT time for another attack to stir up the massive patriotic feelings, and give justification to us staying in Iraq, probably to roll into Iran, and most likely to really expand the Patriot Act.

Bush wont stop until the US owns all the oil in the middle east. What do you think of North Korea DR? Do you think we could eventually go to war with them. I dont think so really since NK actually has Nuclear Weapons.

Drunk,

The US going into Iraq had NOTHING to do with Saddam or WMD, or even 911 (although it was a good excuse).

The REAL reason we went in is because Iraq was leading the charge for OPEC to change oil standard currency from the US Dollar to the Euro. This would leave the US dollar without a hard asset backing, and the dollar would collapse overnight like the yen and peso. We would tailspin into an unrecoverable depression.

We went into Iraq simply to stop this currency conversion. We are eyeing Iran, as they are the next largest vote in OPEC to do the same thing.

NK is FAR more of a military threat than anyone in the mideast.

I think we will still just let NK dig its own grave until they finally piss off China, and we will let China take care of them for us.

Originally posted by dragonrider
NK is FAR more of a military threat than anyone in the mideast.

I think we will still just let NK dig its own grave until they finally piss off China, and we will let China take care of them for us.

Good point! As always.

DR
if thats thats the reason then it was more unjustified and cruel just cos the US dollar had no hard asset backing, i dont belive that theory sorry to say it just no feasible, altho anything is possible with Bush incharge.

drunk

You should believe that, and worse.

The war effort was pre-planned in 1998 by PNAC. The circumstances and "coincidental" terrorist attacks have cemented into the schedule and the marketing campaign to have people buy the war message.

Originally posted by drunk
DR
if thats thats the reason then it was more unjustified and cruel just cos the US dollar had no hard asset backing, i dont belive that theory sorry to say it just no feasible, altho anything is possible with Bush incharge.

I think that theory is dead on drunk. And the most likely scenario. I mean if the OPEC countries changed the standard currency for oil transactions from the dollar to the Euro the US economy and the country would collapse.

Drunk, read this thread. I started this over 3 months ago, it has a LOT of information and evidence for this theory. Have yet to see someone who can disprove it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I cant disprove it i just dont want to believe it to me that is not a fair reason for war just cos 1 countrys currency is gonna suffer it has to declare war on another country just on the basis that it has oil.


[Edited on 24-7-2003 by drunk]