I'd like to submit the following idea for discussion. If we look at the history of events in Iraq, we can see the strong connection between Saddam Hussein and the CIA and US Government. But, according to the conventional wisdom, the connection was "severed" at the time of the invasion of Kuwait, and the US and Iraq became "enemies." But this is probably not true. What if the invasion of Kuwait had been planned and approved by Washington, in order to set up a "proxy war" with Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States? All that a plan like this would require would be the presence of evil, cynical rulers in the US and Iraq-- and a population in the US who were willing to believe what they were told.

Saddam was a US puppet who had already waged one war (against Iran) as a US proxy. So there was a precedent. The difference is that in Kuwait the US would stage an elaborate "liberation" of Kuwait. The liberation of Kuwait would kill many people in Kuwait and kill many Iraqis. But that would mean nothing to Saddam and his US sponsors. The ultimate objective of this plan was to gain military control over Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States. Before 1990, no large US military force would have been allowed in Saudi Arabia. But the invasion of Kuwait changed all that. While the world watched "the liberation" on TV the real agenda was to intimidate Kuwait and Saudi Arabia into lowering oil prices, remaining "moderate" on Israel and "fighting Islamic fundamentalism."

We in the US did not see the fraud but you can bet that the Saudis were fully aware of it. They launched a counter-plot, intending to use the Bush family as a means to accomplish two goals-- 1) to get rid of Saddam Hussein and replace him with a Saudi approved government, and 2) to weaken the US in the region and force the US to withdraw.

The Saudis needed to put G.W. Bush in the White House and they worked very hard to do this. Then they implemented their plan. They destroyed the WTC in a spectacular display of power (with, maybe, some help from "inside") and then they immediately presented GW Bush with an ultimatum: Do our bidding or we will 1) escalate the attacks, including biological and nuclear weapons, and 2) we will publish a full report on the secret deal between GHW Bush and Saddam, disgracing him and prompting his indictment in the world court if not US courts.

The Saudis then ordered GW Bush to invade Iraq, giving him no time to organize. Amazingly, a few US divisions were able to accomplish the task, possibly because Saddam was still following orders from Washington and hadn't realized that he was now expendable. The U.S. launched an invasion of Afghanistan (probably at the urging of the Saudis) in order to create a situation that any Arab trader would love-- a "win-win situation." The Saudis must have reminded GW that a pipeline through Afghanistan, in addition to the oil from Iraq, would offset the "loss of US influence" in Saudi Arabia. That promise would be "the carrot" that would be dangled in front of Bush, while the terror "stick" was held at his back.

In addition, anti-Saudi revolutionaries (Al Queda) were headquartered in Afghanistan, so it's likely that the Saudis felt that this was a very important target. In both cases, Afghanistan and Iraq, the targets of US military power were both enemies of the king of Saudi Arabia.

But the Saudis ultimate goal is to reverse thirty years of Arab dis-unity since Camp David. They are blackmailing the US into doing "atrocities" that are specifically designed to inflame the Arabs against the US. Any sane advisor on the Middle East would have told GW Bush, "Whatever you do, don't let even a HINT of sexual misconduct with Iraqi prisoners occur-- the Arabs have long memories and this type of thing by the Turks led to a general rebellion-- read *Seven Pillars of Wisdom* by TE Lawrence." But, we IMMEDIATELY began to do the ONE thing that would most likely lead to a general revolt! I don't think this is a coincidence.

The confusion in Iraq is the result of the fact that the US government (and the UK, following along) is being blackmailed by the Saudis in the latest chapter in a sordid story of international intrigue. Unfortunately, it's non-fiction.

Interesting take, however, if such a deception is underway and Saddam is a main player, why did we take him alive? Dead Saddams tell no tales. Or are you going to contend next that we simply have a body double in custody?

I don't know. That's a very good question. I have a feeling that Saddam is still playing along with the U.S. After all, why should he blow the whistle? What does he have to gain? If he had been killed, it would have been difficult to prove his identity. As it is, that can be established.

It's possible that the Saudis want him alive for something, but I doubt it.

Remember Manuel Noriega? Where is he now? Are you certain? In my opionion, the "Noriega Experiment- Invasion of Panama" was a "tial run" for the Gulf War. The Panama Invasion proved that the world and the people of the U.S. would "buy" a bogus war.

I believe that Saddam has been promised certain "rewards" if he cooperates, and certain "punishments" if he doesn't. Every word he says now bolsters the credibility of the entire charade. Again-- what does he have to gain by blowing the whistle? He is not a patriot. He's an American stooge.