Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saddam resists a push into exile
USA Today ^ | 9/26/2002 | John Diamond

Posted on 09/26/2002 6:58:07 AM PDT by ex-Texan

Edited on 04/13/2004 1:39:58 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

WASHINGTON

(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: saddamresistexile
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
Saddam would be happy in Saudi Arabia. Why doesn't he flee?

Maybe Saddam is addicted to torture and rape and alcohol and drugs ?

1 posted on 09/26/2002 6:58:08 AM PDT by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Maybe they should offer him a network TV show with Bubba.
2 posted on 09/26/2002 7:02:05 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Or maybe he is just addicted to POWER. That guy aint going nowhere.
3 posted on 09/26/2002 7:03:07 AM PDT by riri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
maybe a buddy-cop show, "Bubba and The Wonderful Leader"
4 posted on 09/26/2002 7:03:46 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
They could call it "Saddamy Tonight!"
5 posted on 09/26/2002 7:03:58 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
The United States and some of its Arab allies have begun a quiet effort to defuse the Iraq crisis by persuading Saddam Hussein to yield power and go into exile.

Would it help if we arranged for one of his wives to have a Senate seat?

6 posted on 09/26/2002 7:07:12 AM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
He can go to Paris and bunk with Suha Arafat!!!
7 posted on 09/26/2002 7:09:48 AM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Why should Saddam choose to go when Mr. Daschle and Mr. Gore have given him permission to stay---with their protection?
8 posted on 09/26/2002 7:13:16 AM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
Maybe Gore and Dash-hole can sweeten up the pot with an offer of a "Monica?"
9 posted on 09/26/2002 7:16:50 AM PDT by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: notorious vrc
I heard this argument on the radio this week. We give him a billion $ and he exits to Syria or someplace like it. Trouble is, there are just too many people who'd like to kill him. When he leaves Iraq, he's dead.
11 posted on 09/26/2002 8:09:58 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
If he stays he's dead. If he leaves, he's dead.

I guess he just has to decide which death is more appealing.
12 posted on 09/26/2002 9:16:21 AM PDT by sharktrager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
We wouldn't need to give him a billion; he could simply take some of the billions he already has.

But look at the strange record of some of these dictators. Pinochet of Chile, who in the long run helped transition the country to democracy, was almost tried and jailed. Saddam would want to avoid a similar fate.

My attitude is that if we make a deal with one of these people, it has to stick unless they go back to their evil ways and start buying weapons. But many people think differently, and a lot of the time I don't think that happens, and Saddam knows this.

Besides, if Saddam was a nice guy or could live in peace, he's had ample incentive to do so over the last decade. If I were him, I'd retire and enjoy my harem of beautiful and talented women. There's no reason why he couldn't do that, but he obviously loves bellicosity for its own sake.

I'm afraid that in the end he will have to die.

D


13 posted on 09/26/2002 10:22:51 AM PDT by daviddennis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Saddam in exile = next Bin Laden
He would have $$ and a cult following among islamic extremists. In my mind this is not an option we can live with (literally).
14 posted on 09/26/2002 11:12:43 AM PDT by BlueNgold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan; okie01; freeperfromnj; dead; Sacajaweau; keri; aristeides; Fred Mertz; Miss Marple; ...
Administration officials made clear this week that they could accept such an outcome as an alternative to war, but the administration does not want to appear to be the originator of the idea, for fear that it would kill any chance Saddam would accept.

Or, to put it more realistically, because people might come to understand that we have been successfully blackmailed into letting Saddam off the hook for 9-11 by his subsequent threat to anthrax the US population.

The people will accept this, BTW, because nobody wants to die. We f***ed up big time (or rather, Bill Clinton f***ed up), and now we have to live with the consequences. But the atmospherics will have to be handled delicately. Hence the Amerithrax hijinks -- and the nonsensical stories about waiting on snapshots secretely taken by Czech emigres to decide whether or not Mohammed Atta did or did not meet Iraqi agent Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani. Like the replicants in Blade Runner, the public needs a "pillow" for its emotions, and Bush is providing one.

15 posted on 09/26/2002 12:04:03 PM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
Like an aggressive water moccasin.
Hand me the 4-10.
16 posted on 09/26/2002 12:11:46 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
I just read Paul Johnson's new little book on Napoleon. Apparently one of the chief reasons Napoleon left his exile on Elba to regain power in France was because the restored French monarchy reneged on its agreement to pay a subsidy to Napoleon on Elba.

For Saddam to accept this kind of deal, we have to provide him guarantees that he can trust. What kind of deal could we make that he could be sure we couldn't back out of?

17 posted on 09/26/2002 12:14:58 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
For Saddam to accept this kind of deal, we have to provide him guarantees that he can trust.

There are no guarantees in this life. Only incentives.

18 posted on 09/26/2002 12:20:12 PM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
People who erect hundreds of statues to themselves while still breathing are in no hurry to go into exile or commit suicide. UNFORTUNATELY
19 posted on 09/26/2002 12:22:08 PM PDT by eleni121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
How about a surgical strike on Saddam alone? Our technology should be good enough to nail him in a surprise attack.
20 posted on 09/26/2002 12:36:35 PM PDT by Rockitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson