Okay this is just hypothetical because that hasn’t been proven. But lets just say for now that all the telecasts we’ve seen since that first night of bombing were pre-recorded. Then who is running the country? One of his sons? If there really were pre-recorded tapes, that would imply that they had a contingency plan for that situation and that they want to keep that a secret from the world and the Iraqi public. So if it is his son, is there a reason why that would shatter the confidence of the Iraquis?
Maybe this should go in IMHO…if so moderator, feel free to move it.
What many people are not aware of is that Iraq has not a Husseinist government. It has a Baathist government. Hussein came to power as part of the inner circle of the Baath Party. Unlike the NSDAP (Germany, 1920s-1945), Baath is not a movement built entirely around the charisma of one leader. Instead, it’s more in the tradition of Bolshevik-style Comintern parties. Thus, the leader can be gone and the party can still chug along.
So is the American goal to remove all Baath party members from power? If that is the case then it seems that the Shiites would greatly benefit. So are they looking at this as a positive thing? And would that mean any future gov’t would have no Baath party members? Isn’t that lke half the population - that wouldn’t be very democratic.
The Baath party is a very small minority of Iraq’s population. It’s essentially like the Communist party in China. A minority oligarchy tyrannizes the majority.
Ah got it…funny how he got 100% of the vote last election…