Saddam Captured

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 11:35am #1

Finally some good news for the Iraqis. The BBC is reporting that he has been captured.

He was found hiding in a cellar in his ancestral hometown of Tikrit, Iraqi official Ahmed Chalabi said.

NeRb666 · 14-12-2003 11:43am

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=4516

The battle for the $25m is underway....

DadaKopf · 14-12-2003 12:11pm

Haha, that site's hilarious! Kurdmedia is my only news source from now on!

Rew · 14-12-2003 12:16pm

Well its been confirmed by the US Gov in a news conference...

mike65 · 14-12-2003 12:24pm

Listening to the press conference now, he gave up without a fight having been dug out of a foxhole in his home town, Blair has already said he should be tried in Iraq by Iraqis while the US has said he should tried in an "international" court. Interesting to see what happens and if the ppl of Iraq are allowed decide his fate...he looks a bit run down!

Mike.

DadaKopf · 14-12-2003 12:26pm

Yeah, very dramatic news. They say he transformed into a giant spider. A spider with a big beard. A rich spider with a beard, and a taxi.

Incredible how months of isolation can do that to a man. Unless this was his secret power all along.

I can't say how it's going to improve the situation much.

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 12:26pm

From that same news conference, they've just shown a video of the tiny 6x8 foot hole down which Saddam was hiding and also video of the man himself with a heavy beard.

daveirl · 14-12-2003 12:28pm

This post has been deleted.

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 12:37pm

Originally posted by DadaKopf
I can't say how it's going to improve the situation much.

The attacks on US troops will probably continue as many of these weren't Saddam loyalists in the first place but foreign fanatics.

However, for many of those celebrating on the streets of Baghdad, the situation has already improved with the capturing of the hated tyrent.

Éomer of Rohan · 14-12-2003 12:43pm

I imagine that the terrorist-in-chief sitting in the White House will make some suitably big speech lauding the victory of the US and the justice served because they have captured one man. With additional grammar and syntax discrepencies free of charge.

Yay, they captured Saddam. What are the bets that he doesn't get the Milosevic treatment?

mike65 · 14-12-2003 12:45pm

Eomer that was sooooo predictable!

They've been doing DNA tests on him just to make sure....

Mike.

Éomer of Rohan · 14-12-2003 12:53pm

Seriously though, I am sitting watching the press conference - it is ridiculous; it seems to say that his capture justifies the entire campaign - how so? Several thousand Iraqis are still dead, the infrastructure of the country still not repaired.

And impartial press my f******g ass. Listen to the cheering!

They removed him from power - THAT would have been the justification of the campaign had the real goal been to protect his people. It wasn't - they need the symbolism of his capture to overcome the intelligence of people in the West who disagreed with the invasion, in a pictorial version of the jingoism which has not stopped since the accession of Bush to power.

We have already discussed that the capture will change nothing - those currently in Iraq who wish to oust the coalition forces are more than likely not Saddam loyalists - see Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion for comparison. The capture of Saddam may actually buoy any Al-Quaida (and other) terrorist cells (and their supporters amongst the populace) operating in Iraq - they hated Saddam too, and with him out of the way, if they realised their goals of removing the USA, then there would be a power vacuum into which they could step.

DadaKopf · 14-12-2003 12:53pm

The attacks on US troops will probably continue as many of these weren't Saddam loyalists in the first place but foreign fanatics.

However, for many of those celebrating on the streets of Baghdad, the situation has already improved with the capturing of the hated tyrent.

Psychologically, Iraqis have some "closure". Although I don't think they're too stoked about Ahmed "The Thief of Baghdad" Chalabi assuming a premier position in the new Iraqi government.

I don't see how the situation for the average Iraqi celebrating on the streets or sitting in their shops and houses protecting them from looters has improved with Saddam's capture.

The country is awash with guns, there's no national security force, the country is perceived by most as being occupied by an invading force, the national infrastructure is nearly non-existent, Iraqis don't fully understand democracy and when the Iraqi economy is written again, the money is going to flow out to America.

With these massive obstacles to the process of building a legitimate, secure state apparatus, I'm very pessimistic that things are likely to improve for a long time.

A little psychological relief is nothing compared to the deeply structural crisis Iraq and its population is enduring.

And then there's Saddam's army of giant spiders....

bonkey · 14-12-2003 12:58pm

Originally posted by mike65
They've been doing DNA tests on him just to make sure....

Thats the one bit of the story that really piqued my curiosity...I wasn't aware that DNA tests could be carried out that swiftly. And what DNA are the comparing it to?

(Having said that, the chance of them getting the ID wrong is pretty slim, IMHO, but no doubt we'll hear stories for years about a conspiracy theory where this isn't Saddam.)

What amuses me slightly is that the US - those bastions of support for the ICC - apparently want an international court. I'm wondering if this is internationalism in the same way that the Coalition of the Willing is (i.e. run by the US), or in the way that (say) the UN is...

What worries me is that if Saddam was hiding in this little underground bunker/cell, its highly unlikely that he was masterminding all of this resistance - which was quite often suggested - which would mean that his capture is less likely to dramatically improve the current situation in terms of violent "resistance". I'd love to be wrong on that though....

jc

Johnmb · 14-12-2003 1:10pm

Originally posted by bonkey
What amuses me slightly is that the US - those bastions of support for the ICC - apparently want an international court. I'm wondering if this is internationalism in the same way that the Coalition of the Willing is (i.e. run by the US), or in the way that (say) the UN is...

I'd say they are just playing lip service. They have no intention of setting up an independent court to investigate and prosecute. For all the stuff he did, the only thing such a court would really be interested in is the gassing of the Kurds, and there is no way the US would want that investigated too rigerously. They will either set up a show trial run by themselves, or run by the puppet government in Iraq.

demanufactured · 14-12-2003 1:14pm

he looks like chalres manson lol

irishgeo · 14-12-2003 1:17pm

Surely he knows where these big bad weapons of mass destruction are hidden.

ll bet he will be able to say "its the second sand dune on the right after Baghdad.

Bush wins the next election, just when the polls were going agaist him.

Shame the cant find Osama Bin Laden a real danger to the world i think.

DadaKopf · 14-12-2003 1:56pm

Wow! Bremer wasn't lying!

PHB · 14-12-2003 2:04pm

Its good fo the americans to put him in the international court.

When he gets trialed for all the war crimes, more and more people will become aware for what he did, and it will provide the public with another "justified" reason for invading Iraq, and thus take the pressure off the WMD search.

Johnmb · 14-12-2003 2:07pm

Originally posted by PHB
Its good fo the americans to put him in the international court.

When he gets trialed for all the war crimes, more and more people will become aware for what he did, and it will provide the public with another "justified" reason for invading Iraq, and thus take the pressure off the WMD search.

The problem for the US is that an internation court won't just investigate Sadam's role in the crime, they will investigate the crimes themselves, and there are a number of high ranking Americans who were involved in that too, hence the US will keep a tight reign on whatever show court they do set up.

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 2:09pm

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
And impartial press my f******g ass. Listen to the cheering!

Hardly surprising that some Iraqi journos would cheer when the image of their hated oppressor appeared on the screen. Concern about lack of impartiality on such an occasion seems out of place under such circumstances.

bus77 · 14-12-2003 2:17pm

Where they will hold the the trial?
Some are saying this will open a can of worms for the US when it goes to trial. Personally I dont think they give a ****.
If it's handeld in a Iraqi court he will be executed, the US would prefer if it went like that.

adnans · 14-12-2003 2:20pm

adnans

Johnmb · 14-12-2003 2:26pm

Originally posted by bus77
Where they will hold the the trial?
Some are saying this will open a can of worms for the US when it goes to trial. Personally I dont think they give a ****.
If it's handeld in a Iraqi court he will be executed, the US would prefer if it went like that.

Which might not be the best thing for Iraq. Hopefully, he will face trial under a free Iraqi regime (not the current puppet government), and hopefully they will not execute him. Life in prison, or even exile (common for such people) would be best. While the US likes to ignore it, the fact remains that a lot of the Sunni population genuinely did support him, and if he is treated too badly, they may turn against the government. Look at what happened here after 1916, the leaders had very little support, until the aftermath. The last thing Iraq needs is for Saddam to be made a martyr. If they treat him well, and show mercy, it may help heal the wounds. Revenge is not a good thing under the circumstances.

Sparks · 14-12-2003 2:30pm

Originally posted by SkepticOne
Hardly surprising that some Iraqi journos would cheer when the image of their hated oppressor appeared on the screen. Concern about lack of impartiality on such an occasion seems out of place under such circumstances.

Tell that to Walter Cronkite just after he'd announced JFK's assassination. A journalist's job is to be impartial, especially under such circumstances. You're there to report, not give an op-ed piece.

I was amused, though, by the reaction to the one single real question asked - in rather broken english - by an arabic journalist : "Could he really have run the guerilla operation from that hole in the ground?".
Never seen a four-star fall back so fast

Cork · 14-12-2003 2:30pm

Originally posted by Johnmb
They will either set up a show trial run by themselves, or run by the puppet government in Iraq.

I think that the people of Iraq who suffered under Saddam - now know that Saddam will never again be in a position of power in their country.

This will be a big relief to them. I think this guys capture has to be welcomed.

I think that the US should not have broadcast the medical examination but the clean shaven pictures will give the Iraqi people some degree of assurance.

There is still a job of work to be done to rebuild and reconcile Iraq.

I hope the US - will not forget that the lot of the Iraqi people needs improvement.

Saddam deserves due process. But - Attention should also focus on setting up credable and accountable administration in Iraq to work for it's people.

ReefBreak · 14-12-2003 2:38pm

A certain section of the Anti-War crowd must be well disappointed today - their favourite socialist, tyrannical psychopath is finally caught.

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 2:42pm

Originally posted by Johnmb
Life in prison, or even exile (common for such people) would be best. While the US likes to ignore it, the fact remains that a lot of the Sunni population genuinely did support him, and if he is treated too badly, they may turn against the government. Look at what happened here after 1916, the leaders had very little support, until the aftermath. The last thing Iraq needs is for Saddam to be made a martyr. If they treat him well, and show mercy, it may help heal the wounds. Revenge is not a good thing under the circumstances.

A very different situation to the 1916 leaders. None of the 1916 leaders were brutal dictators that rulled with an iron fist for 25 years for a start. I don't believe there was singing and dancing in the streets when the 1916 leaders were captured.

Certainly he could not be tried by the Iraqis right now. The institutions aren't in place to do this. However, I doubt if exile will be considered as an option regardless of who tries him.

While Saddam did have support from some within the Sunni community, it will be interesting to see how much of this remains now that he is no longer in a position to help his supporters.

Cork · 14-12-2003 2:45pm

Originally posted by Johnmb
Which might not be the best thing for Iraq. Hopefully, he will face trial under a free Iraqi regime (not the current puppet government), and hopefully they will not execute him. Life in prison, or even exile (common for such people) would be best. .

I hope the guy faces trial. I really don't see exile as much of a sanction.

Pat Rabbitt seemed to mention this idea but Connor Lenihan seemed to rule it out:

[QUOTE"There can be no soft option for Saddam Hussein, offering him asylum sends out a message to other dictators that they can break international law in the knowledge that when the time comes they too can seek asylum."

"If we were to act on the recommendation of the Labour leader Ireland would also run the risk of being completely isolated internationally. We cannot be seen to offer Saddam a get out of jail card." [/QUOTE]

DadaKopf · 14-12-2003 2:48pm

Originally posted by adnans

adnans

OUTRAGEOUS!

Johnmb · 14-12-2003 2:49pm

A very different situation to the 1916 leaders. None of the 1916 leaders were brutal dictators that rulled with an iron fist for 25 years for a start. I don't believe there was singing and dancing in the streets when the 1916 leaders were captured.
No, but they were heckled, spat at, totally disowned by a very pissed off public. It wasn't until the British executed them in such a harsh manner that the general public turned against the British and towards the cause of the 1916 leaders.

Certainly he could not be tried by the Iraqis right now. The institutions aren't in place to do this. However, I doubt if exile will be considered as an option regardless of who tries him.

While Saddam did have support from some within the Sunni community, it will be interesting to see how much of this remains now that he is no longer in a position to help his supporters.
History is a big factor. He single handedly brought Iraq into the 20th century, by setting up hospitals, road networks, electricity, universities, etc. His supporters, and those who are fairly indifferent, make up a large minority. The last thing Iraq needs is for these people to feel he was treated too harshly. Execution is not the way to go. I reckon life in prison, however, if exile is best for peace that should be done.

Sparks · 14-12-2003 2:50pm

Originally posted by ReefBreak
A certain section of the Anti-War crowd must be well disappointed today - their favourite socialist, tyrannical psychopath is finally caught.

Wow, that rose from the grave pretty fast :rolleyes:

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 2:56pm

Originally posted by Sparks
Tell that to Walter Cronkite just after he'd announced JFK's assassination. A journalist's job is to be impartial, especially under such circumstances. You're there to report, not give an op-ed piece.

So you believe the Iraqi journalists should have acted with more decorum in the press conference. Fine. An unusual concern but you are entitled to it.

Biffa Bacon · 14-12-2003 2:56pm

Originally posted by ReefBreak
A certain section of the Anti-War crowd must be well disappointed today - their favourite socialist, tyrannical psychopath is finally caught.

Naturally. What's good for peace, justice, democracy and human rights is bad for the loonies. Personally, I can't wait to hear them start their whining over this. Eomer and Sparks have already got it off to a good start, hopefully we'll hear more like:

"He won't be able to get a fair trial he should be released."
"They're parading him on TV, it's a breach of the Geneva Convention"
"They're not parading him on TV, what have they got to hide?"
"Is it just a coincidence they captured him, if it really is him, just as support for the war is dropping in the US?"
"Shaving off his beard - that's a war crime!"
"This will cause more violence."

I'm sure you can think of a lot more.

Mr Pinchy · 14-12-2003 2:58pm

Window dressing! Thats all it is. After the US occupation of the country, he was never in a position to hold power again. They say they will hand over power next year, but the US influence will be running policy for years yet. The only difference is that it wont be Americans in plastic bags anymore. Just examine their previous track record for confirmation.

Saddam has been brilliant for US policy. After 9/11, Rumsfeld had written memos within hours stating that this attack can be used to attack Iraq. And then the big lie began, how they had to get Saddam and everyone conveniently forgot about Al Qaieda. They targeted them covertly for sure but the spin docs made sure that Saddam was the enemy in the public eye. His may have been a terrible regime but it is not up to the US to change it. They do not have the Iraqi goodwill nor public support to rebuild the county, they have been covertly bombing it for ten years since Gulf War 1 and starving the people with sanctions leading to the deaths of thousands of children through lack of basic medications and not to forget cancers developed by the leftover radiation caused by deplated uranium tank shells from GW1. Weapons of mass destruction my ass. Iraq has never had the capability to attack American territory and has never done so. However, it did have the capability to attack Israel.....

This will be a great PR coup for George and Tony, there will be interviews abound and everyone will forget the real issues. US soldiers will still be attacked. George may even get re-elected. Im sure Tony is f***ed though.
In terms of strategy, Saddam has been the US best friend. Before him, they could never have militarily dominated the middle East, there would have been massive uprisings. But since Gulf War 1 and 2, they have been allowed station troups in swathes of territiory from Afghanistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and Syria.
They now have direct and indirect military control over the entire middle east.

By the way, did no-one else find it inconspicuous about the cheering "Iraqi journalists" sitting conveniently in the front row? Surely that is CNN, ABS, NBC, Time and Newsweek seating?
And since when does Iaq have an independent press and journalists, Under martial law, that is one of the first things you can kiss goodbye to.

bus77 · 14-12-2003 3:04pm

Originally posted by Johnmb
Which might not be the best thing for Iraq. Hopefully, he will face trial under a free Iraqi regime (not the current puppet government), and hopefully they will not execute him. Life in prison, or even exile (common for such people) would be best. While the US likes to ignore it, the fact remains that a lot of the Sunni population genuinely did support him, and if he is treated too badly, they may turn against the government. Look at what happened here after 1916, the leaders had very little support, until the aftermath. The last thing Iraq needs is for Saddam to be made a martyr. If they treat him well, and show mercy, it may help heal the wounds. Revenge is not a good thing under the circumstances.

But you have to think about the type of charges they will bring against him. Genocide against the kurds will be the main one.
Similar charges that would have been laid against Hitler if he had lived.
You cant put a strong case like that before a court and simply recomend life imprisoment.
Milosevic got away with it because of the "Semi War" type thing that was going on.

Its true that the 1916 leaders got more respect when they were dead, and maybe the same will happen to Saddam.
But the only person Ive heard compared to Saddam is Hitler and he's a martyr to no one.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 14-12-2003 3:10pm

But the only person Ive heard compared to Saddam is Hitler and he's a mayter to no one.

you're bloody joking right?

have you even HEARD Of stormfront?

Johnmb · 14-12-2003 3:11pm

Originally posted by bus77
But you have to think about the type of charges they will bring against him. Genocide against the kurds will be the main one.
For which he could use the defence that they were uprising against Iraqi rule during a war with Iran. While that doesn't justify what was done totally, it would be hard to argue that any other country would react any differently.

Similar charges that would have been laid against Hitler if he had lived.
You cant put a strong case like that before a court and simply recomend life imprisoment.
No, Hitler invaded countries and carried out the genocide, he wouldn't have been able to claim that the people he ordered dead were guilty of treason.

Milosevic got away with it because of the "Semi War" type thing that was going on.
No, I think you'll find that the death penalty was not an option due to capital punishment not being considered "civilised" any more. If Saddam faces an independent international court, he will not face execution.

You mentioned exile, the only leader I know that got that was Napoleon and again that was for "War" stuff.
Many others have faced exile, including the guy Saddam replaced.

Its true that the 1916 leaders got mayter status when they were executed, and maybe the same will happen to Saddam.
But the only person Ive heard compared to Saddam is Hitler and he's a mayter to no one.
Only the US compare him to Hitler for propaganda. He was nowhere near that scale in reality.

Sparks · 14-12-2003 3:17pm

Originally posted by bus77
But you have to think about the type of charges they will bring against him. Genocide against the kurds will be the main one.

That's never going to be tried. The US had exceptionally dirty hands over Halajba and other such atrocities.
I think we'll see him charged with charges that the US can be sure they're left out of, and given the death penalty as quickly as possible to prevent any embarressing interviews...
.... assuming of course, he doesn't do what his son did and shoot himself in the head. Twice.

You cant put a strong case like that before a court and simply recomend life imprisoment.

What's wrong with life at hard labour in siberia?
You guys are far too eager to put him out of his misery. I mean, think about it - he did commit atrocities - why give him a quick, clean, painless end to things?

But the only person Ive heard compared to Saddam is Hitler and he's a martyr to no one.

Except the neo-nazis and the BNP, who are now in government in the UK, don't forget.

ykt0di9url7bc3 · 14-12-2003 3:17pm

the DNA tests will be comparissons from his son's DNA....so i'm told

Sparks · 14-12-2003 3:20pm

Originally posted by SearrarD
the DNA tests will be comparissons from his son's DNA....so i'm told

And what exactly did they compare his son's DNA to when they "captured" him?

ykt0di9url7bc3 · 14-12-2003 3:44pm

the 2 sons were properly ID'd at the time of thier death, their were no intellegence reports concerning body doubles for them....

more than likely their DNA would have been sampled anyway and it should give a picture of 2 brothers and subsequently propely confirm the ID of the prisoner believed to be saddam...

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 3:44pm

Originally posted by Sparks
And what exactly did they compare his son's DNA to when they "captured" him?

The plot thickens...

14-12-2003 3:51pm

So...What exactly will Saddam be tried for? As people have already mentioned, the gassing of the kurds wont be brought up, but what other major crimes are there? He was in bed with the Americans for so long, that surely he knows a few things that they wouldn't want us to know..

Also, they probably wont be able to kill him, but are they going to jail him up in Iraq?? He would have to be guarded 24/7 by a helluva lot of American troups, and if there was ever a coup after the Americans left(which could very well happen) he could end up back in power

dahamsta · 14-12-2003 3:54pm

Originally posted by ReefBreak
A certain section of the Anti-War crowd must be well disappointed today - their favourite socialist, tyrannical psychopath is finally caught.

I know we're supposed to attack the post and not the poster, but there something wrong with someone that would make a statement like that. Even as a troll it's sick.

adam

dathi1 · 14-12-2003 3:59pm

Good to see him out of the picture at this stage in the Bush campaign...any later and it would have consolidated a victory for PNAC and Bush for November.. I hoped they would get him before Christmas...preferably dead. I reckon the resistance will slog it out regardless. Its flavour of the month, the pop tune of today, but there's a long way to go before the break up of Iraq. Watch for the delay tactics to pan the trail out for October.

bonkey · 14-12-2003 4:06pm

Originally posted by dahamsta
Even as a troll it's sick.

I thought about it....and decided that although distasteful, it is correct.

There is unquestionably an amount of those who were against the war who did want Saddam to remain in power. He and his cronies, for example, were definitely anti-war, and I'm sure that there are still some of them out there who are disappointed that he's been captured.

So, from that perspective, it struck me as a comment which is pedantically defensible...which is why I let it slide....I didn't think anyone would actually rise to the bait.

jc

SkepticOne · 14-12-2003 4:09pm

Originally posted by utility_
So...What exactly will Saddam be tried for? As people have already mentioned, the gassing of the kurds wont be brought up, but what other major crimes are there?

Murder, torture, human rights abuses etc. Type of thing.

Victor · 14-12-2003 4:27pm

Originally posted by Cork
Pat Rabbitt seemed to mention this idea but Connor Lenihan seemed to rule it out:

There can be no soft option for Saddam Hussein, offering him asylum sends out a message to other dictators that they can break international law in the knowledge that when the time comes they too can seek asylum."

"If we were to act on the recommendation of the Labour leader Ireland would also run the risk of being completely isolated internationally. We cannot be seen to offer Saddam a get out of jail card."

I haven't ssen much news today, but if this refers to Pat Rabittes commments back in February / March, I believe they were for teh purposes of avoiding the war, not allowing dictators off scott free. Perhaps Conor Lenihan likes the bloods on his^H^H^H other peoples hands - oh sorry FF were against the war weren't they?

Originally posted by Johnmb
He single handedly brought Iraq into the 20th century

And Il Duce made the trains run on time. Somehow, I doubt Saddam dug every drainage canal in Iraq.

Johnmb · 14-12-2003 4:33pm

Originally posted by Victor
And Il Duce made the trains run on time. Somehow, I doubt Saddam dug every drainage canal in Iraq.

Completely irrelevant whether he did or not. The fact remains that he is seen as the provider of lots of very good things, at least to the Sunnis in central Iraq. For all the crap he is guilty of to the Kurds and the Shiah, chances are that he would have easily won a fair election amoung the Sunni, so in order for a new, peaceful Iraq to emerge it may be necessary not to be too harsh on the man that one of the main groups considers to have been beneficial to the country. By the same token, the other groups may want him to face some sort of trial, but it is hard to see what he will be tried with at the moment.

Sand · 14-12-2003 4:38pm

Great news. The coalition have shown they can capture at least one of their "big" targets - got to be hope for capturing Osama. Its good to see the Iraqis out celebrating in the street, this spells the absolute end of Saddams regime and its cruelty. Its also nice as it disproves claims that the coalition would never take Saddam alive because of embarrassing details which may come to light. The major question now is how and where hell be tried - hopefully the Iraqis will be allowed to try him but he will and hed probably be right that hed never get a fair trial from Kurds and Shi'ites. An international court may be the answer but it needs to be careful to ensure the UN is given its proper role - As minor as possible and preferably none.

Given his condition and living quarters it seems highly unlikely he was masterminding the resistance so I dont think it will have a major effect on their operations right now but given a surprisingly high level of support for Saddam and Bathists this will hopefully serve to undermine that support and thus provide a smaller base of support for the resistance. It will also reassure the Iraqis that the coalition can and will beat the resistance, that Saddam and his regime is finished and again reduce the level of support for the terrorists.

As for the reporters cheering when they saw pictures of Saddam were sighs of dissapointment honestly expected? Im sure when people heard Hitler blew his brains out reactions were a bit more lively than "Oh".

This and the trial will probably mean another 4 years of Bush - Bush and co will certainly milk it shamelessly. With the economy on the up and Saddam behind bars Bush is giving his democratic opponents a good deal less to attack him on.

Murder, torture, human rights abuses etc. Type of thing.

Surely as the head of a state hes protected by his nations sovereignty? Thats what I gathered from before the war anyway:|

Saddam Captured

Comments