Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : TRIAL OF SADDAM HUSSEIN -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: calgal who wrote (181)	12/19/2003 10:52:15 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 493

The end of the myth of Saddam Charles Krauthammer (archive) December 19, 2003 \| Print \| Send WASHINGTON -- The race is over. The Oscar for Best Documentary, Short Subject, goes to ... ``Saddam's Dental Exam.'' Screenplay: First Brigade, U.S. 4th I.D. Producer: P. Bremer Enterprises, Baghdad. Director: the anonymous genius at U.S. headquarters who chose this clip as the world's first view of Saddam in captivity. In the old days, the conquered tyrant was dragged through the streets behind the Roman general's chariot. Or paraded shackled before a jeering crowd. Or, when more finality was required, had his head placed on a spike on the tower wall. Iraq has its own ways. In the revolution of 1958, Prime Minister Nuri as-Said was caught by a crowd and murdered, and his body was dragged behind a car through the streets of Baghdad until there was nothing left but half a leg. We Americans don't do it that way. Instead, we show Saddam -- King of Kings, Lion of the Tigris, Saladin of the Arabs -- compliantly opening his mouth like a child to the universal indignity of an oral (and head lice!) exam. Docility wrapped in banality. Brilliant. Nothing could have been better calculated to demystify the all-powerful tyrant. It was a beautiful sight. But it was more than that. It was a deeply important historical moment. More than the fate of a man is at stake here. At stake is the fate of an idea, an idea of singular malignancy that has cost the Arabs not just countless innocent lives, but a half-century of progress. Saddam was the most aggressive and enduring exemplar of a particular kind of deformed Arabism, a kind that arose in the post-colonial era, appealed to the greater glory of the Arab nation and promised a great restoration. Ironically, its methods and ideology were imported from the West, the worst of the West. The Baath Party was modeled on the fascist parties in early 20th-century Europe. Its economics were Western socialism at its most stifling and corrupt. Saddam then created the perfect fusion of the two, producing a totalitarianism of surpassing cruelty modeled consciously on Stalin's. Saddam's destiny is important because he was the last and the greatest of these pan-Arab pretenders, though he gave it a psychotically sadistic character unmatched anywhere in the Arab world. This stream of Arab nationalism brought nothing but poverty, corruption, despair, torture and ruin to large swaths of the Arab world. The mass graves of Iraq are its permanent monument. Which is why it was important not just to capture Saddam, but to demystify him -- and with him, the half-century spell that radical pan-Arabism had cast over the entire Middle East. It was important that the God-King of pan-Arabism be shown as the pathetic coward he was. It was important to finally shatter what Fouad Ajami had called ``the dream palace of the Arabs.'' And to banish the grotesque fantasy, perpetrated by Saddam and his acolytes in the Arab intelligentsia, that Arab greatness -- once built on a magnificent civilization of science, culture and tolerance -- is to be built upon blood, power and cruelty. It seemed as if that fantasy had been dealt a fatal blow when Baghdad fell so suddenly on April 9. Instead of the promised Battle of Baghdad, confronting and perhaps even stopping the Americans in heroic street-by-street combat, there was nothing. Just ignominious collapse. The Arab media, particularly the al-Jazeeras that have long lionized Saddam and promoted ``Baghdad Bob's'' comical claims of Iraqi war victories, were shocked and humiliated. They themselves had to admit that this was the greatest psychological blow to Arab nationalist pretensions since the similarly vainglorious Nasser was routed by Israel in six days in June 1967. But then came the Iraqi insurgency: the bloodying of the Americans, the doubts at home, the charges of ``quagmire,'' the visions of Vietnam, the notion that the United States might in the end be defeated -- tire and leave the field, once again to Saddam. On the run, Saddam enjoyed one final moment of myth: the ever-resourceful, undaunted resistance fighter. Perhaps, it was thought, he had it all calculated in advance, fading silently from Baghdad like the Russians withdrawing from Moscow before Napoleon, to suck in the Americans only to strike back later on his own terms in a brilliant guerrilla campaign masterminded by the great one himself. And then they find him cowering in a hole, disheveled, disoriented and dishonored. After making those underground tapes exhorting others to give their blood for Iraq and for him, his instantaneous reaction to discovery was hands-up surrender. End of the myth. It is not just that he did not resist the soldiers with the guns. He did not even resist the medic with the tongue depressor. ©2003 Washington Post Writers Group URL:http://www.townhall.com/columnists/charleskrauthammer/ck20031219.shtml

To: calgal who wrote (181)	12/19/2003 11:20:14 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 493

Libya to Give Up Arms Programs, Bush Announces By DAVID E. SANGER and JUDITH MILLER Published: December 20, 2003 ASHINGTON, Dec. 19 — President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain announced Friday that Libya's leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, had agreed to give up all of his nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, a step Mr. Bush said could allow Libya to "regain a secure and respected place" among nations. Libya's actions came after nine months of secret diplomacy, beginning with an overture from Colonel Qaddafi to London and Washington just as the invasion of Iraq was beginning. Mr. Bush's aides, clearly seeking to build on the capture of Saddam Hussein last Saturday, described the Libyan action as directly linked to the Iraq war, suggesting that Colonel Qaddafi had decided to give up his weapons aspirations rather than face off against the United States and its allies. Speaking to reporters in a hastily called session in the White House press room, Mr. Bush praised Colonel Qaddafi's agreement to open his country to full inspections. This is the first time Colonel Qaddafi has admitted to having such unconventional weapons or programs to produce them, government and independent experts say. But the details given by the White House indicated that for more than two decades, Libya had deceived international nuclear inspectors who have visited the country. Like Iran, it hid facilities to produce nuclear fuel, though it did not appear that the Libyans actually succeeded in making the kind of fissile material needed to produce a bomb. "Because Libya has a troubled history with America and Britain, we will be vigilant in ensuring its government lives up to all its responsibilities," Mr. Bush said. His announcement came just two days before the 15th anniversary of the bombing of Pan Am 103, an act of terrorism for which a Libyan agent was convicted two years ago. In a clear reference to North Korea and Iran, two other countries that are suspected of pursuing programs to develop unconventional weapons, Mr. Bush added that "I hope other leaders will find an example" in Libya's action. In two trips to Libya, including one earlier this month, American and British intelligence and weapons experts were given a tour of the country's arsenal, reportedly including mustard gas, a World War I-vintage chemical weapon, and materials for making nerve gas and missiles, the latter from North Korea. None of these discoveries surprised the experts. But one senior Administration official told reporters on Friday evening that the Libyans had gotten "much further" in their nuclear program than the United States had suspected, showing the Western visitors centrifuges that could be used to produce highly enriched uranium. The officials declined to say what kind of centrifuges had been found, or what nations appeared to have helped Libya. Both North Korea and Iran have similar programs under way, though the administration official said that in Libya's case, Colonel Qaddafi's government had not declared that it had actually produced any weapons-grade uranium. "That is something we will be pursuing," the official said. He added that the United States had learned a considerable amount about North Korea's missile trading business in the course of the talks with Libya. A British official said the Libyans had shown visitors 10 nuclear-related sites, adding that while the country had not manufactured a nuclear weapon, "it was close to producing one." Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency will be sent to assess how close, and to monitor the dismantling of the facilities, British and American officials said. Not surprisingly, the White House described the surprise announcement as a victory for Mr. Bush in facing down rogue states developing such weapons. They also touted the Libyan move as vindication for the decision to go to war against Iraq — where no unconentional weapons have been found — because of the message it sent. "In word and action, we have clarified the choices left to potential adversaries," Mr. Bush told reporters. "And when leaders make the wise and responsible choice, when they renounce terror and weapons of mass destruction, as Colonel Qaddafi has now done, they serve the interest of their own people and they add to the security of all nations." The Libyan government, in a statement, said it had made the decision of its own "free will." nytimes.com