Saddam sentenced to death by hanging

[audiotech]

Who gives a shit? Saddam is going to get hanged, which is as he was a ruling class cunt.

Yeah and he killed one of his relatives who was a communist.

 

[ViolentPanda]

let Luther answer.

I wasn't aware that Id prevented Mr. Blissett from answering.

Ah, I haven't, have I?

your just making a tit of yourself.

"Shock and awe" is a sound bite about american airpower. No where in the world is air power considered unconventional nor has it been since 1915.

An ad hominem and a straw man in one reply. Well done.

I haven't actually claimed there's anything "unconventional" about air power though, have I? I've merely conveyed the point that Mr. Blissett possibly meant conventional groundwar without the indiscriminate destruction of civilian as well as military targets prior to the ground war beginning.

As for "shock and awe" itself, it wasn't the mere exercise of airpower that you imply it to be. It also relied on naval power.

What was that you were saying about making a tit of oneself?

 

[laptop]

Good. Agree the timing is suspect though.

It is widely expected that the execution will be rushed so that Saddam cannot give evidence at Majeed's trial about collusion between Washington and the former tyranny, which could grievously embarrass the US.

Some ultra-lefty? Nope. Max Hastings it is.

 

[Luther Blissett]

"Conventional" ground war sans "Shock and Awe"?

Pretty much. See below.

Vietnam?

Well, yes, Vietnam goes w/o saying, and fuck knows what Laos was about, so getting back to the US Military Sims, when US were trying to land troops at Umm Qasr, the US troopship was sunk by Iraqi Forces.
The US Sim carried on as though the casualties hadn't happened with the next stage of the game resurrecting all those troops 'killed' at Umm Qasr and appearing' incredibly undead a few miles down the road, all kit with them, at Basra. After suffering massive defeat at Basra at the hands of Iraqi forces/urban guerillas, the troops were again miraculously resurrected, and posited at their next destination, and so forth, all the way to Baghdad and beyond to Mosul.

What is your source for "Every traditional military simulation " and putting emphisis on the "every", who has access to every simulation and said they all failed.

moono has provided a nice webpage for you. Cheers, moono.

Possibly the wargame sims the Pentagon ran where the ret'd marine corps general running the Iraqi side managed to wipe the floor with the US on every sim (using standard small unit and geurrilla tactics) until his opponents "handicapped" him so heavily that he couldn't deploy.

Yes, those Sims.

It's actually "coin tel pro", an old school name for enthusiasts of the old 2p & 5p phone boxes.

LMAO. coin tel pro was the term given to the lad down our street that used a serrated band from a plastic milk-bottle-cap to hoik out £1 coins that had got stuck in ANY phone box

Some ultra-lefty? Nope. Max Hastings it is.

Apologies for quoting Hastings, but it was a shock to find he was among the only people berating Bush's intent to hang Saddham, even before the trial.

Has anyone read this from Robert Fisk: This was a guilty verdict on America as well

 

[david dissadent]

I've merely conveyed the point that Mr. Blissett possibly meant

So your post is pure speculation on what the other poster meant. Nuff said.

 

[david dissadent]

Luther did you make this statement up? Do you have source that the bulk of the debt Iraq incurred was for american kit, can you tell me what that kit was that cost more than all the T-72'S, g-5S Type 69s and Mirages and Migs?
[/quote]Iraq was in debt to the US for all the military equipment it had supplied them with to fight their war against Iran. [/quote]

Also you have provided evidence of one test that appeared rigged do you have any evidence to back the assertion that every test was?

 

[Loki]

Will he ever be executed though? He's got loads of cases pending AFAIK for which presumably he'll need to be alive to answer to.

Well, there has been talk of the pending cases not being pursued, since he has already been given the death penalty. I can't remember by who though I think it was the Iraqi "authority".

Very convenient for the White House that would be, seeing as some of them would inevitably go into how the USA helped Saddam.

eta: er, as discussed further above this post!

 

[mauvais]

The sims were funny, if you believe the stories. "Refloating" was my favourite term. http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html

 

[Luther Blissett]

Luther did you make this statement up? Do you have source that the bulk of the debt Iraq incurred was for american kit, can you tell me what that kit was that cost more than all the T-72'S, g-5S Type 69s and Mirages and Migs?

"]Iraq was in debt to the US for all the military equipment it had supplied them with to fight their war against Iran."

I'll say that again. Iraq WAS in debt to the US for ALL the MILITARY EQUIPMENT it (US) had supplied them (Iraq) with to fight their (US/Iraq) war against Iran.
Saddham had not paid up front for the kit he was supplied with by the US. That's called 'being in debt to'.

Also you have provided evidence of one test that appeared rigged do you have any evidence to back the assertion that every test was?

You're the bastard son of Cheney-Rumsfeld and I claim my $5!

 

[Luther Blissett]

The sims were funny, if you believe the stories. "Refloating" was my favourite term. http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html

that is quite a good re-telling. not seen that one before. thanks, mauvais.

And whatever agenda van Ripen had, do you really think the brass who "refloated" the ships he sunk are any more objective? Their careers are all riding on the success of this operation and they've got just as much reason to lie or fudge the results.

The story just got dirtier as it bounced around the web. The gullible types who believe everything the Pentagon tells them, decided to trust the brass -- van Riper was just a troublemaker. The paranoid types, the ones who think the CIA controls the weather, took it for granted that the whole war games were fixed from the start.

A lot of the arguments came down to the question of what war games like Millennium Challenge are about. Trusting war-nerds were saying on the web, "Well, the whole POINT of war games is to show up weaknesses! So naturally when van Ripen sank the ships, they made a note and restarted the games!"

It's a nice idea, but kinda naive. Most war games aren't neutral at all. They're supposed to showcase a new weapon or doctrine. Millennium Challenge was supposed to showcase high-tech joint-force doctrine. So when van Ripen sank the fleet, you can bet that the guys running it didn't just say, "Well played, old boy! We must make a note of your tactics in order to avert such mishaps in the future!"

What most casual readers won't get is that some of van Ripen's moves are chickenshit, and don't amount to anything-but others are so damn scary that the US Navy will be trying to live them down for years.

That trick of sending messages by motorbike is a good example of a move that gets lots of publicity and sounds smart but doesn't mean much. OK, you send your messages by bike. For starters, that means they move at 30 mph, unlike radio messages, which are almost instant. That's a huge disadvantage. And what happens if your biker gets strafed? No message-or a captured message. I'd be happy to fight an army that had nothing better than motorbikes to communicate with.

But what van Ripen did to the US fleet...that's something very different. He was given nothing but small planes and ships-fishing boats, patrol boats, that kind of thing. He kept them circling around the edges of the Persian Gulf aimlessly, driving the Navy crazy trying to keep track of them. When the Admirals finally lost patience and ordered all planes and ships to leave, van Ripen had them all attack at once. And they sank two-thirds of the US fleet.

That should scare the hell out of everybody who cares about how well the US is prepared to fight its next war. It means that a bunch of Cessnas, fishing boats and assorted private craft, crewed by good soldiers and armed with anti-ship missiles, can destroy a US aircraft carrier. That means that the hundreds of trillions (yeah, trillions) of dollars we've invested in shipbuilding is wasted, worthless.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Can't say the world will be a worse place without him. For that matter I can't say it would be a worse place if the whole Bush administration were lined up next to him.

 

[david dissadent]

Sorry Luther but your seem lost. Here is your post in context.

1989 - the Iraq-Iran war ended, with no winners. Iraq was in debt to the US for all the military equipment it had supplied them with to fight their war against Iran. Then Saddham fell out with Kuwait, and believing he had US blessing for the invasion, went ahead, but the US feared Iraq would gain control of oil production and turned against him.

It was only after this, that US and British media conveniently discovered the massacres of the Kurds and Iraqi oppositionists. The US and its NATO allies, with UN backing, launched war against Iraq in 1991. They slaughtered Iraqi conscripts and civilians and then betrayed the Kurds whom they claimed they were liberating.

Now you are telling an abreviated narritive of the history of Iraq. Debt for American millitary equipment was insignificant versus the billions it owed to America and others for non American millitary kit. It largest debts were to its Arab neighbours Saudi and Kuwait. Why o why bring up minor debts for some trucks and helicopters. Worse you cant actualy tell me what millitary equipment Iraq got from the US. Well Ill do your job for you and give you your evidence.

Although official U.S. policy still barred the export of U.S. military equipment to Iraq, some was evidently provided on a "don't ask - don't tell" basis. In April 1984, the Baghdad interests section asked to be kept apprised of Bell Helicopter Textron's negotiations to sell helicopters to Iraq, which were not to be "in any way configured for military use" [Document 55]. The purchaser was the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. In December 1982, Bell Textron's Italian subsidiary had informed the U.S. embassy in Rome that it turned down a request from Iraq to militarize recently purchased Hughes helicopters. An allied government, South Korea, informed the State Department that it had received a similar request in June 1983 (when a congressional aide asked in March 1983 whether heavy trucks recently sold to Iraq were intended for military purposes, a State Department official replied "we presumed that this was Iraq's intention, and had not asked.") [Document 44]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Anyone reading this however is in for a bit more of a bumber suprise than discovering America sold some agricultural helicopters to Iraq that had millitary uses. This is a doozy, one of my favourites. It has good solid source doc on Americas involvement with the Iraqi CNB programs and the pieste de rasistance is Document 1

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq01.pdf


Source doc strongly indicating Israel assisted Iran with its chemical weapons program.


Anyway Ill see if I can be bothered to hunt around for other stuff later.



E2A

What is your source for "Every traditional military simulation " and putting emphisis on the "every", who has access to every simulation and said they all failed.

You have provided information on a single exersize of mixed providence. Do you have anything absolutely anything to back up your claim that "Every traditional military simulation " had america loosing in Iraq? And if it did why did the simulations get it so wrong when the Iraqis were steamrollered?

 

[ViolentPanda]

So your post is pure speculation on what the other poster meant. Nuff said.

It's actually informed speculation, so hardly "nuff said", but please feel free to continue making assumptions. It's most amusing.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The sims were funny, if you believe the stories. "Refloating" was my favourite term. http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html

Didn't you realise that you can refloat an entire US naval fleet (displacing several hundred thousand tonnes) in a matter of hours?

All you gotta do is have the good lord behind ya.

 

[Luther Blissett]

Sorry Luther but your seem lost. Here is your post in context.

methinks you doth protest too much

You have provided information on a single exersize of mixed providence. Do you have anything absolutely anything to back up your claim that "Every traditional military simulation " had america loosing in Iraq? And if it did why did the simulations get it so wrong when the Iraqis were steamrollered?

try emphasising 'every traditional military simulation' instead. it might help you to understand the context better. talking about landing troops, marching from A-B, surrounding towns/cities, securing/capturing towns/cities, leaving troops in towns/cities, moving on to C, repeating process, etc.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'll say that again. Iraq WAS in debt to the US for ALL the MILITARY EQUIPMENT it (US) had supplied them (Iraq) with to fight their (US/Iraq) war against Iran.
Saddham had not paid up front for the kit he was supplied with by the US. That's called 'being in debt to'.

Although technically the US didn't lose by it as their equivalent of the "export credit guarantee" system picked up the tab, so Colt, Lockheed et al still got their coin.

You're the bastard son of Cheney-Rumsfeld and I claim my $5!

A bit harsh imho.

Possibly the legitimate child, though.

Although he just smells like a particularly ill-informed and opinionated student to me.

 

[ViolentPanda]

methinks you doth protest too much

It's a bit much when someone is pompous enough to inform you of the context of your own post, isn't it?

try emphasising 'every traditional military simulation' instead. it might help you to understand the context better. taking about landing troops, marching from A-B, surrounding towns/cities, securing/capturing towns/cities, leaving troops in towns/cities, moving on to C, repeating process, etc.

Bear in mind that Mr. "dissadent" had a hard time with the idea of a "conventional ground war", which is pretty much the same thing as a "traditional military simulation" would run.

 

[david dissadent]

methinks you doth protest too much


try emphasising 'every traditional military simulation' instead. it might help you to understand the context better. taking about landing troops, marching from A-B, surrounding towns/cities, securing/capturing towns/cities, leaving troops in towns/cities, moving on to C, repeating process, etc.

Do you have a source that every simulation provided this outcome yes/ no.

Secondly your use of the word traditional. What you seem to be describing is holding and securing every piece of land. What tradition is this? The decapatation strike has worked since the records began, invading and focussing totaly and overcoming a center of power without holding onto every blade of grass you cover. If you wish I could give numerous examples. Who told you this was traditional or did you make that up or have you found yet another definition?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Source.

If you look back a page you'll notice that a link has been posted.

 

[Luther Blissett]

A bit harsh imho.

Maybe, but he's only just worked out I had written a very short (abbrev.) history I clearly stated at the time that even writing that much had given me a headache, and asked if anyone would like to take over. (or using own initiative, expand upon)

Although he just smells like a particularly ill-informed and opinionated student to me.

source

Two different sources have been posted: http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1060102.php

 

[david dissadent]

Maybe, but he's only just worked out I had written a very short (abbrev.) history I clearly stated at the time that even writing that much had given me a headache, and asked if anyone would like to take over. (or using own initiative, expand upon)


Two different sources have been posted: http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1060102.php

For a single exersize that totally failed to recreate the real war. Got a source that EVERY exersize showed that Iraq would defeat america in a 'normal' fround war. A new type of war you have invented on the spot as it has no 'shock and awe' in it. No one can say what all this means other than some young boys are up past there bed times. Does momy know your still using the internet?

 

[Luther Blissett]

Do you have a source that every simulation provided this outcome yes/ no.

Secondly your use of the word traditional. What you seem to be describing is holding and securing every piece of land. What tradition is this? The decapatation strike has worked since the records began, invading and focussing totaly and overcoming a center of power without holding onto every blade of grass you cover. If you wish I could give numerous examples. Who told you this was traditional or did you make that up or have you found yet another definition?

Sah, Yes Sah, the objective was to enter Iraq, end the regime of Saddam, eliminate weapons of mass destruction, capture or drive out terrorists, collect intelligence on terrorist networks, collect intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction activity, secure Iraq's oil fields, deliver humanitarian relief and end sanctions, help Iraq achieve representative self-government and insure its territorial integrity,free the Iraqi people and capture Saddam, Sah!

 

[david dissadent]

Do you have a source that every simulation provided this outcome yes/ no.

Lol tres amusing. Beats debating with well informed people.

 

[moono]

LB;

Sah, Yes Sah, the objective was to enter Iraq, end the regime of Saddam, eliminate weapons of mass destruction, capture or drive out terrorists, collect intelligence on terrorist networks, collect intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction activity, secure Iraq's oil fields, deliver humanitarian relief and end sanctions, help Iraq achieve representative self-government and insure its territorial integrity,free the Iraqi people and capture Saddam, Sah!

All right, all right and what about securing our Great Leader Bush's strategic and financial interests in Israel, you sloppy apology for an informed soldier.

 

[Luther Blissett]

All right, all right and what about securing our Great Leader Bush's strategic and financial interests in Israel, you sloppy apology for an informed soldier.

Sah, yes Sah! We're still waiting for training vid sim v.2 and 3 to be released - Full Rapture Warrior - "Tomorrow Jerusalem v.2," and "The Day after Tomorrow, Damascus v.3"!

Sah! As I understand it, use neocon politicians and media to scare Israel to start proxy war with Iran and Syria, with threat of CIA operatives arming all religious national extremists against Israeli Government, Sah! Iran and Syria to finish off Israel and throw all Jews down the well. Glorious Jihadijuice will feed the End Times prophesies of our Glorious people. Praise the Lord and his Burning Bush, Sah! Those Semites won't know what hit 'em, Sah! They kill each other while we hide in Kurdistan. If Israel refuses to bow down, give 'em the Saddam treatment, Sah! After Israelis knocked out, we walk in and declare that Jesus has returned. Sah!

 

[moono]

That's right son, they'll feel the might of christian pacifism. Well stated and I'm gonna put you on the list for voluntary bayonet practise. Carry on.

 

[Dubversion]

Has anyone read this from Robert Fisk: This was a guilty verdict on America as well

i was about to link to that. Powerful stuff

 

[nino_savatte]

Lol tres amusing. Beats debating with well informed people.

Do you always compliment your own posts?

 

[jæd]

So.. Did the USA (and the UK) made Saddam a dictator and a thug...? Because reading his biography he was a nasty bit of work from the beginning...

It would be nice if we never had to deal with evil people like Saddam, but in life you have to. If the US and let Saddam carry on then they would be equally bad, but at least he has been brought to justice...

 

[Dubversion]

what simplistic toss