As I write this it is still uncertain whether or not the US military has succeeded with its latest “decapitation strike”, and killed Saddam Hussein, but it seems to be fervently believed and hoped for.
It just strikes me as very odd, this obsession with “getting” Hussein. I can recall no other war or military action in which the goal seemed to center about the removal of one single person, with the exception of the invasion of Panama to get Manuel Noriega. I know that the goal is, as always, the removal of the regime, rather than just the person, but it seems to be felt that getting the leader in this case will give the same result. Yet if we had gone to war with Russia after WWII just to get Stalin (who was as bad, or worse, in removing potential rivals) we’d still have had Khrushchev and that gang.
And even in Panama, we weren’t trying to kill Noriega, but capture him, which we did.
If this looks like the big US military trying to assassinate Hussein repeatedly to me (who doesn’t like the guy), I’m sure it must look like that to a lot of other folks in the world, especially those who have some sympathy for him. Is this really the best way to proceed?
Well Coldfire OBL was not attached to a sovereign nation now was he.
Is this the best way to proceed you ask Cal. I think for a nation that is relying heavily on media, and propaganda like Iraq, it is one way to quell the masses. Though it will infuriate some, I believe it will end the war quicker if Saddam were to be killed.
Officially no, in either case – we weren’t supposed to be trying to kill them. At least, we officially haven’t been since Ford signed the law forbidding assassinations of foreign leaders. (I assume this doesn’t hold in times of war.)
As for Osama bin Laden, we put out a request for him dead or alive. I think they’d like to get Osama alive. But I get the distinct impression they’d be happier with Saddam Hussein dead. And that, to me, is remarkable. They didn’t insist on getting the Nazi leaders dead – they insisted on the War Crimes TRial. Nobody insisted on Ho Chih Minh dead or any other adversaries.
Aside perhaps from the strike against bin Laden in Afghanistan (and I don’t recall so many well-publicized “decapitating strikes” even in that case), this is the first time I can recall the military literally trying to kill the opposing team’s leader as a major point of the conflict.
Yeah, we shot down Yamamoto – but that’s different from a Head of State. We didn’t try to kill Hitler, AFAIK. We didn’t try to kill the Emperor, or even Tojo, IIRC.
And apparently everyone agrees that it’s legal to kill the opposing head of state during a war:
