Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

'Saddam, US had pre-war deal'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
dArKeR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 11:42 AM
Original message
'Saddam, US had pre-war deal'
Moscow - Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein cut a deal with the United States before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, former Russian prime minister Yevgeny Primakov said in an interview published on Thursday.

"There was an understanding with the Americans, as paradoxical as it may seem," Primakov told the Russian daily Gazeta in a lengthy interview.

"Why weren't the bridges of the Tigris blown up when the American tanks approached Baghdad? Why weren't Iraqi aviation and tanks used, and where are they now?" asked Primakov, a former head of the Russian secret service and a specialist in Arab affairs who was formerly on good terms with Saddam.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_1547794,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MirrorAshes Donating Member (942 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. Gets wierder every day, I swear.
What to believe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. How sad has Imperial Amerika become when I believe this ex-Commie
over our Imperial Family and their Stooges?

Pretty bad.

I didn't say I fully believed Primakov, just that whatever level of belief I placed in him is GREATER than that which I have for the Imperial family and their Battalion of Lying Liars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
3. this after putin's statement
on iraqi terrorism. weird.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
colonel odis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
4. so ask saddam about it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
russian33 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
5. oh come on...
Yevgeny Primakov was a prime minister at some point in the the 90's...how the hell does he know what did or did not happen in 2003?

and maybe the reason they can't find any traces of Iraqi aviation, is cause there is none...this country was under sanctions after all..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gWbush is Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
6. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the rest of the story is important
"Why was there an immediate ceasefire? Why was there practically no resistance a year ago?" he added.

Primakov, who now heads Russia's chamber of trade and industry, also cast doubt on the authenticity of footage of Saddam's reported capture that circled the world on December 14.

"They showed two soldiers with guns with palm trees in the background near the hole (where Saddam was reportedly hiding). At that time of year, date palms are never in bloom," he said.

"Finally, any man can tell you that such a long beard (as Saddam had when he was reportedly caught) could not grow in seven months," he said.

"All evidence suggests that Saddam surrendered earlier and the story of the hole was invented later," he said.

Primakov, who was also Russian foreign minister, made two secret trips to Iraq at the request of President Vladimir Putin, shortly before the invasion by US and British troops.



BASICALLY, the whole "quick invasion" of military might was staged as was the capture of Saddam.

holy shit.

call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think there is a major conspiracy behind EVERYTHING this administration says and does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oreegone Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Ok now I'm paranoid
I can't get to the link, it doesn't exist. It says News24 can't be found.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. link works for me
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
7. I have respect for Primakov--he should have been president, not Putin.
Primakov understands a lot about the current int'l crisis, and the crisis in Russia since its collapse into disaster in 1991. I wonder if he is right about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
russian33 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. To put his statement in perspective, here's some info on Primakov
Edited on Thu Jun-24-04 12:32 PM by russian33
Yevgeny Maksimovich Primakov (born October 29, 1929) is a former prime minister of Russia. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, he was an important official in the KGB. After the formation of the Russian Federation, he became a close associate of President Boris Yeltsin and during the late 1990s was one of the highest-ranking members of the government, serving as foreign minister from 1996 until 1998 and as prime minister from 1998 until he was fired in May 1999. In March 2003 he visited Iraq, in a failed attempt to convince his alleged friend, Saddam Hussein, to give up some of his power in order to prevent war with the United States, a move which received some support from several nations opposed to the war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevgeny_Primakov


Also (from 1998)...

"Many majority Republicans and minority Democrats are already angry at what they consider Primakov's efforts to bolster dictator Saddam Hussein against the US-led campaign to maintain sanctions against Iraq until it fully discloses its illicit weapons-of-mass-destruction programs."

http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/durableRedirect.pl?/durable/1998/09/11/fp8s2-csm.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tracer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
8. I recall stories ...
... implying that the * administration had paid off Iraqi generals to just go away and not oppose the invasion. Which is slightly different than claiming that there was a deal between the U.S. and Saddam.

How they could get operatives close enough to pay off top Iraqi brass has always been a mystery to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rawstory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
11. bump
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
13. Primakov may be past his prime, but you have to wonder.
I mean, I was super shocked those bridges never got blown and never understood why. But the reason could be quite different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
14. they had a "relationship!"
because they did!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
15. Saddam complicit in his own capture?
Weird.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keithyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
16. It really could have been a deal but they forgot to tell the Iraqi people!
Who knows anymore what the truth is. It is for sure that the US and Saddam were pals throughout the 1980's when the 'great communicator' reigned. Saddam received most of his weapontry from good ol'e Ronnie and the gang. I wondered about the length of Saddam's beard when I first saw his pictures but I passed it off as Iraqi men's beards must grow faster. So when were we looking at Saddam's doubles and when were we not? That's the question. Only his plastic surgeon knows...I guess.
Will the real Alfred E. Newman in the WH please stand up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Remember the DU threads on the "Date Palms" with links to when
date palms bloom, and the analysis of the photograph of the soldiers removing the cover of his "spider hole" and what was in the background.

We had a long thread going on this with much speculation that something wasn't right about Saddam's discovering. The "Wackadoo" element here on DU (including myself) felt the whole story was concocted and Saddam had been captured months before.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Miss Authoritiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Oh, yes, I remember the date palm threads.
Never thought it was wackadoo. My only question is this: what does Saddam get out of the deal? Other than total escape to some rogue luxurious island somewhere, the best deal would be not being turned over to an Iraqi justice system and maybe joining Slobodan Milosevic in the Hague. And the US is still playing out the string about when and how we'll turn over Saddam to the Iraqis. So, maybe. But why would the US and Saddam trust each other? And who was the go-between?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
colonel odis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. what does saddam get out of it?
he gets to avoid being handed over to the iraqis. can you imagine what the general populace would do to him and his corpse?

perhaps that's why the u.s. is becoming adamant about keeping saddam in its custody after the transfer of power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Maybe Bush reneged on the deal with Saddam. It wouldn't be the first
time Bush stabbed someone in the back. Maybe Saddam thought he had WMD and told Bush where they were, and when it didn't pan out, Bush/Cheney said, you will be tortured for this and you won't be allowed to exile?

BTW: Some of us DU'ers got tired of bein called "tinfoilhatters" so we started calling ourselves the "Wackadoo's" It was a joke on ourselves.

I'm proud of my "Tinfoil." Seems it's turned out to be tuned in to the "truth" vibes more than not wearing it. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #22
25. Agree. If there was a deal, the Bushistas would likely renege.

The Bushistas p*ssed off the UN by carefully talking around to negotiate 1440, then turned and gave it a different meaning when that was convenient for them. Later, they played a similar trick on CARICOM, negotiating one approach to the Haiti "crisis," then following a different tack while claiming (incorrectly) that CARICOM had signed on. The basic Bushista stance is, we talk some with you, then we do what we want, as we insult you gratuitously. Cheney's remark to Leahy is quite representative of the Bushista philosophy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BadGimp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
18. say what..
""All evidence suggests that Saddam surrendered earlier and the story of the hole was invented later," he said. "

Oh Boy...is the cat getting outta the bag here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wabeewoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-24-04 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
21. I remember at the time
that bush said he was invading even if Saddam surrendered. I really doubt this is true but if it is, then what exactly was the point of all the loss of life? We could have had a bloodless coup. Besides, the bridges not being blown up just means we planned to use them. Still....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Why didn't the Red Guard blow them up, not the US??? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tlcandie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. To fill the coffers of he and his compadres?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drool_n_yank Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-26-04 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
26. Rember this
Edited on Sat Jun-26-04 10:43 AM by drool_n_yank
In late May, 2003, General Tommy Franks announced his retirement. Shortly thereafter, he confirmed in an interview with Defense Week that the US had paid Iraqi military leaders to defect. The extent of the defections and their effect on the war were not clear as of this writing (May 24, 2003).

http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/2/20/2003_invasion_of_iraq_1.html

I cant find a better link to that story but it was all over back in 03 .

It wouldn't surprise me if Saddam was included in the deal with the other Iraqi military leaders to defect. Gives shock and Awe a new purpose , to give the appearance of an an all out invasion , with a real enemy army and a real victory and not simply a walk in and occupy . This was necessary to convince the public their brave leader just won a war with a sizable and formidable enemy . Was there ever a real target or just a few pockets of resistance ? Just a big fireworks display . Imagine going to a big sports event and only one team shows up the other refuses to play. You have already sold the public tickets and you don't want to give a refund . Turnout the lights in the arena and let the commentators ramble about the excitement of the game, the dominance of the home team and mix in some sound bites over the arena's PA of bone crushing blows or squeaking sneakers and sssswish SCORE ! Then have lots of comments from retired players . Thats what I remember .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC