US in Secret Talks for iraqi Military officials to Surrender

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I just read this on CNN's website.Hopefully this is true & maybe we can avoid a conflict:

U.S. officials told CNN on Wednesday that surrender negotiations have secretly begun with key Iraqi military officials in hopes that some military units will not fight U.S. and coalition forces if there is war.

Communications with these Iraqi military officials are not being handled by the Pentagon, but instead by other elements of the U.S. government, the officials said.

One senior official said that some elements of the Iraqi military may have already agreed not to fight.

This underscores assessments by both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency that the leadership around Saddam Hussein is brittle. Officials have been making that assessment somewhat public as part of their effort to publicize what they say is Saddam's vulnerability.

The officials said they could not give specifics, out of concern that Saddam would enact retribution.

To the dismay of the U.S. officials involved, the secret effort was first publicly hinted at Tuesday by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

When asked at a press conference how the Iraqi military could signal support for the U.S. effort, Rumsfeld said, "They are being communicated with privately at the present time. They are being, will be communicated with in a more public way. And they will receive instructions so that they can behave in a way that will be seen and understood as being non-threatening."

One official said Rumsfeld's public acknowledgment about the private communication was not expected.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
ar

ar

i hope there`s some truth to that report.....i worry about the republican guard,though.....inside baghdad,things could be difficult..with reports of potential suicide bombers at the ready.....here`s hoping it goes smoothly with few casualties.... thanks
 

shamrock

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
8,459
532
113
Boston, MA
I saw this interview with Rumsfeld, right in front of the entire press pool he starts spouting this out. Honestly couldn't believe it, could this guy possibly be this stupid??:shrug:
 

Blazer

ontherocks
Forum Member
Jan 4, 2003
3,201
3
0
49
Nashville
www.madjacksports.com
whoop

whoop

Whoop.jpg
 

Eddie Haskell

Matt 02-12-11
Forum Member
Feb 13, 2001
4,595
41
0
26
Cincinnati
aclu.org
I wonder if somebody (whether its us or them) is gonna whack this guy before the shootin starts.

Would give Bush an out to save face with the world and save a ton of Iraqi lives. Just a thought.

Ed
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I happen to like the job Rumsfeld is doing. I like straight talkers, tend not to trust smooth talking politicians or dimplomats.

I know you are kidding about whacking Rumsfeld, but you got it backwards. The person to whack is saddam, he is the one not living up to the treaty he signed after going into Kuwait. If you care about saving a ton of iraqi lives because of war, what about the ton of iraqi people that saddam now kills, rapes or tortures.


One of my pet peeves in politics is intelligent people who blindly think their political party of choice is always correct. I have friends, who are very successful in life or college grads who think that the republican party, no matter the issue is always right, & I have friends who are also successful in business & highly educated always side with the democrats, no matter the issue.Logic tells me that this is impossible to always agree on every issue with your party.
Samething with the iraqi crises. The people who are now against a war with iraq, supported Clinton's actions in 1997 against saddam. For example, the actor Mike Farrell who is protesting this potential war, exclaimed, after Clinton used more bombs on iraq than the Gulf War used in 1991,"at least Clinton is trying to do something" against saddam. The only logical answer I have for this flip is that Mike Farrell is a democrat.He supported going after this murderous thug when a democrat was in office, but opposes now because a republican is calling the shots. He is one example of letting our national security be affected by politics, which imo very shameful.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,607
255
83
"the bunker"
i have to say

i have to say

ar1....that is the most objective,correct comment i`ve seen on this board to date....there is a dearth of independent thinking people in this country....everything falls along political lines....it`s sad,but,oh so true...
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I guess because we all know it here and Im sure others do. Well it's not secret anymore. Sounds like a on pupose slip it out to the world.
Just caught this info. AR no way did we use more bombs in four days in 1998 then we did back in 91.
 
Last edited:

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
DJV,

I forgot where I read about the number of bombs that were dropped in the two battles. I think Clinton dropped over 600 bombs. I will try to find the info. Meanwhile if someone else knows where to find that info, I would appreciate it.
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
78
So Cal
I thought Eddie was referencing whacking Saddam. Same things would be accomplished for Bush and the world as a whole.I get a kick out of the fact that Congress gave Bush a virtual blank check last October ( I think Braun was only dissenter) to use military force to disarm Hussein. What did they think at the time, the "W" was just kidding? My guess is that since October falls before November elections, politicians were doing what they all do best - appease the voters with whatver BS works. There is no party line when it comes to that scam.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
Ferdville,

I just re-read what Eddie wrote & you may be right that he meant whacking saddam. If that is the case please forgive me Eddie.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Looking at a old paper on the 91 war. Its says over 4000 bombs and missles were used on Iraq. After we had got his belly nice and soft. Then we hit Iraq with the land invasion part of it. If my old brain is right we bombed hell out of Iraq for three weeks.
 

Eddie Haskell

Matt 02-12-11
Forum Member
Feb 13, 2001
4,595
41
0
26
Cincinnati
aclu.org
Ar I was refering to whacking Sadaam. However,.......... hmmmm.......Rumsfeld? Just kidding. I don't believe in whacking hawks.

My belief is that when you have nation-states in conflict such as US and Iraq, if you really intend to use arrmed agression as a last resort, you must leave the other side some wiggle room in order to save face.

Bush doesn't seem to want to leave Sadaam any wiggle room. Sadaam has to be able to say to his people that he got something out of this in order not to be 1) whacked, 2) overthrown, 3) be able to lead his people.

I know many of you are saying he must disarm. Some in the world think he is albeit slowly. Blix or whatever his name is, is not sayin pull the trigger yet.

With that in mind, this is the basis for my concern that Bush's real intention is to get him out of power and not to disarm Iraq. For those of us that are old enough, its a lot like the Cuban missle crisis.

Kennedy had to give Kruschev some way out that he could save face short of war. Otherwise he would have lost power with the politboro.

While I believe that Hussein murders his people, does that give another country the right to invade. Hell, whats the CIA for anyway. If our goal is humanitarian then why don't we get Chuck Norris to take a sabbatical from those silly infomercials with Christie Brinkley, bring him outta retirement and have him and the Delta force whack Sadaam.

Where's Lieutenant Braddock when you need him.

Ed
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,561
314
83
Victory Lane
Eddie Haskell said:
If our goal is humanitarian then why don't we get Chuck Norris to take a sabbatical from those silly infomercials with Christie Brinkley, bring him outta retirement and have him and the Delta force whack Sadaam.

Where's Lieutenant Braddock when you need him.

Ed

I heard that Bruce Willis called Bush and volunteered to go into Iraq and whack Saddam.

Bush instead put Willis in charge of a foster children program. I guess thats where he could do the most good.


Scott King of Dogs
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
When I said yesterday above this may be a slip to the press. Well they were talking this up at the stock market today. It worked there. Best day in about 3 months. Anyone who doesn't think all this war talk, delays and just plain BS. Is not kicking the hell out of the stock market and economy. Well this rumor shows folks are paying attention.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top