Log in

View Full Version : Interview with Saddam Hussein: He was concerned about Iran, not America


Baraka
10-07-2004, 04:25 PM
"Do you think we are mad?"

The weapons inspectors who interviewed Saddam say he was obsessed with security -- and more concerned about deterring Iran than taking on the U.S.

By Jamie Wilson

link (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/07/saddam_iran/index.html)

Oct. 7, 2004 | Saddam Hussein refrained from using weapons of mass destruction during the first Gulf War because of the effect it would have had on world opinion, according to the Iraq Survey Group's report, released to the public Wednesday.

The former Iraqi president was interviewed by interrogators compiling the report on the country's WMD, which paints a picture of a man obsessed with his own place in history as well as his own security. Asked by a U.S. interviewer in 2004 why he had not used WMD against the coalition during Desert Storm in 1991, Saddam Hussein replied: "Do you think we are mad? What would the world have thought about us? We would have completely discredited those who had supported us."

The quote is one of the few directly attributed to the former dictator, who was captured in December 2003 in a hole in the ground underneath the outbuilding of a farmhouse south of Tikrit.

"These discussions were conducted and controlled by one debriefer and spanned several months," the report said. "Some vital insights emerged during these discussions, which elicited views and information that might be considered revelatory. There was no incentive and or motivation for Saddam to co-operate with the debriefer, except to shape his legacy," the report states.

"Saddam is concerned with his place in history and how history will view him. Therefore, Saddam had no choice but to engage his debriefer in both formal and informal discussions on events that occurred during his reign."

The report gives several tantalizing glimpses of Saddam's rationale for his WMD policy. The report says that he thought WMD had saved the regime many times. He believed that during the Iran-Iraq war chemical weapons had halted Iranian ground offensives and that ballistic missile attacks on Tehran had broken its political will. Similarly, during Desert Storm Saddam believed WMD had deterred coalition forces from pressing their attack beyond the goal of freeing Kuwait. When asked, during a custodial interview, whether he would have reinstituted a WMD program after sanctions were lifted, his answer implied that Iraq would have done what was necessary.

The report also states that Saddam kept up the pretense that Iraq still had WMD capability to frighten Iran, rather than the U.S. or Britain. "He explained that he purposefully gave an ambiguous impression about possession as a deterrent to Iran," the report's authors wrote.

The report also reveals how far Saddam had deluded himself into thinking Iraq was immune from U.S. attack. According to the Iraq Survey Group, Saddam apparently calculated that Iraq's natural resources, secular society and dominance in the region would inevitably force the U.S. to deal with Iraq.

The report also gives insight into Saddam's view of Iraq and himself. Saddam saw Iraq as the natural leader of the Arab world, and himself as the latest in a long line of great Iraqi leaders, stretching back to Nebuchadnezzar and Saladin.

One of his favorite books was "The Old Man and the Sea," Ernest Hemingway's Nobel prize-winning story of one man and his struggles to master the challenges posed by nature. "Saddam tended to characterize, in a very Hemingwayesque way, his life as a relentless struggle against overwhelming odds, but carried out with courage, perseverance and dignity," the report notes.

But his rule was driven first by security concerns -- survival came first. Saddam told interrogators he had only used a telephone twice since 1990 for fear of being located for a U.S. attack.

He went on a palace- and mosque-building extravaganza in the late 1990s, employing 7,000 construction workers, when much of Iraq's economy was at the point of collapse. "His rationale for this was concern for his personal security. He stated that by building palaces the U.S. would be unable to ascertain his whereabouts and thus target him."

Ace42
10-07-2004, 04:34 PM
This is of no surprise, I have been saying this since WMDs were first mentioned. The war with Iran was difficult, both sides used chemical weapons, and it ended in a nasty stalemate. Considering Iran is thought by many to be working on nukes, it would've been suicide for Saddam to say "yeah, the US bum-raped us, and our asshole still isn't healed."

There mere fact that the recent war took no time at all goes to reiterate what Ramsey Clark and others were saying over a decade ago - Saddam didn't have as much as we thought, and what he did have was smashed into a billion pieces, all his soldiers and a lot of the male population of the correct age were wiped out, the next war he'll be fighting is with sticks.

I knew this, Ramsey Clark and Noam Chomsky knew this. Why was this obvious answer not discussed? The only conclusion is that the establishment chose not to consider it.

ASsman
10-07-2004, 05:46 PM
The people who have to read and believe this kind of stuff, refuses. Is that irony?

edb1821
10-07-2004, 05:50 PM
The fact that you people will take the word of Sadaam Hussein over the President of the US is disturbing. :eek:

infidel
10-07-2004, 06:00 PM
The fact that you people will take the word of Sadaam Hussein over the President of the US is disturbing. :eek:You should try to make it less obvious when you don't read the complete article or at least ask questions if you don't understand.

EN[i]GMA
10-07-2004, 06:02 PM
The fact that you people will take the word of Sadaam Hussein over the President of the US is disturbing. :eek:

Why? Because he's a bad guy? You can learn a lot from the "bad guys". Sometimes things the "good guys" don't want you to hear.

deita
10-07-2004, 06:12 PM
The fact that you people will take the word of Sadaam Hussein over the President of the US is disturbing. :eek:

the fact that you take the word of george w bush saddens me :(

grass_roots
10-07-2004, 06:26 PM
wierd, me and saddam share the same favourite book

QueenAdrock
10-07-2004, 07:07 PM
The fact that you people will take the word of Sadaam Hussein over the President of the US is disturbing. :eek:

They're both terrorists who rely on fear to do their bidding.

Ace42
10-07-2004, 07:10 PM
The fact that you people will take the word of Sadaam Hussein over the President of the US is disturbing. :eek:

I wonder why:

http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs_108_2/pdfs_inves/pdf_admin_iraq_on_the_record_rep.pdf

one topic, 237 Lies, tens of thousands of deaths, millions of dollars.

D_Raay
10-08-2004, 01:41 AM
I knew this, Ramsey Clark and Noam Chomsky knew this. Why was this obvious answer not discussed? The only conclusion is that the establishment chose not to consider it.

Or perhaps it wasn't in their best interests to discuss it Ace?

Schmeltz
10-08-2004, 01:47 AM
Saddam Hussein is the Agathocles of our time. I wish we could have a look at what they'll be saying about him a hundred or a thousand years from now.