Interrogator: Saddam surprised by U.S. attack

[Gunny]

Associated Pres
updated 6:33 p.m. CT, Fri., Jan. 25, 2008

NEW YORK - Saddam Hussein allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction to deter rival Iran and did not think the United States would stage a major invasion, according to an FBI interrogator who questioned the Iraqi leader after his capture.

Saddam expected only a limited aerial attack by the United States and thought he could remain in control, the FBI special agent, George Piro, told CBS’s “60 Minutes” program in an interview to be broadcast Sunday.

“He told me he initially miscalculated ... President Bush’s intentions,” said Piro. “He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 ... a four-day aerial attack.”

“He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack,” Piro said.

In 2003, a close aide of Saddam's told The Associated Press that Saddam did not expect a U.S. invasion and deliberately kept the world guessing about his weapons program, although he already had gotten rid of it.

Keeping up the illusion of weapons program
Saddam publicly denied having unconventional weapons before the U.S. invasion, but prevented U.N. inspectors from working in the country from 1998 until 2002 and when they finally returned in November 2002, they often complained that Iraq wasn’t fully cooperating.

more ... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22847771/

Straight from the horse's mouth.

 

[Gunny]

I can't possibly concentrate on all the replies here what with all those crickets chirping in my ears.

 

[CSM]

Interesting, isn't it! We have pages and pages of posts about Bush and how he lied, how evil he is, how incompetent, and how stupid but not one comment on Saddam. I suppose that if the left makes a comment agianst Saddam, it removes all implications of "victimhood" which runs through every post they make about Bush.

 

[Shogun]

So bush fell hook, line and sinker for the facade of Saddam. Does that make you feel BETTER about his NON-DOUBT of phantom WMDs? Does that REALLY suggest that Bush didn't lie by stating that there "WAS NO DOUBT"? Good god, fellas, are you REALLY going to try and back out of the entire public face or your political pony circa 03-04 by falling back on Bush's STUPIDITY and inability to seperate the fabrication of Saddam from the same truth that he had "no Doubt" about?





Yes, I'd probably pick that scab too if I were in your position.

 

[mattskramer]

So bush fell hook, line and sinker for the facade of Saddam. Does that make you feel BETTER about his NON-DOUBT of phantom WMDs? Does that REALLY suggest that Bush didn't lie by stating that there "WAS NO DOUBT"? Good god, fellas, are you REALLY going to try and back out of the entire public face or your political pony circa 03-04 by falling back on Bush's STUPIDITY and inability to seperate the fabrication of Saddam from the same truth that he had "no Doubt" about?





Yes, I'd probably pick that scab too if I were in your position.

Iraq was not a threat against the USA. We had time. We had time to recruit spies and have them gather irrefutable proof of WMD. He and time to strengthen out intelligence and double check our information – but our unilateral cowboy with the itchy trigger finger would have none of it. I’ll say it again. The Iraq was (1.) unnecessary and (2.) handled poorly.

 

[rayboyusmc]

but not one comment on Saddam. I suppose that if the left makes a comment agianst Saddam, it removes all implications of "victimhood" which runs through every post they make about Bush.

I don't think I have ever read any lefty call Saddam a victim. He was an arrogant dictator who was guilty of mass murder. No one misses him. But he wasn't a real problem to US. The victims are the dead service men and women and the dead Iraqi civilians killed by collateral damage. Yeah, I know the other side has killed a lot of innocents, but I am not on their side and they are assholes.

To launch a war, kill almost 4000 of our best young people, wound another 20,000 + and we have no idea of how many Iraqi civilians was and is total bullshit on Bush's part. We could have just assasinated Saddam if he was the problem. The war wasn't launched to get Saddam.

And the facts revealed by Saddam's interogator does nothing to prove in any way that Bush didn't lie, cherry pick and push the fukking fear card just to get his war. I watched part of the Interogator's interview on TV. He also proved that the chicken hawks love of torture is another fantasy of those cowards. He got all his information the old fashioned way. He earned it.

 

[jasendorf]

I can't possibly concentrate on all the replies here what with all those crickets chirping in my ears.

I'll bite.

So, what you're saying is that you and the extremist right-wing in this country who were thirsty for war were completely duped by a ruse designed to keep the Iranians in check? Your defense for the invasion is, "our intelligence agencies are too stupid to know the difference between real intelligence and Saddam puffing his chest out."

Don't know about anybody else, but I would like to think our intelligence agencies are better than that... and, from the looks of everything I've seen, they were. It wasn't until Rove & Co. made up "facts" to support a war their base was so thirsty for that our intelligence agencies were thrown under the bus.

What do you want us to say? "Saddam duped President Bush"? OK... done. Saddam duped President Bush.