Thanks, JC.
Helluva day.
And I repeat - what of the immense courage to kick the door down when you’ve been told that the guy in there has 45 pounds of TNT wired to a thumb button, and he is so desperate that he will do ANYthing to keep your hands off of him?
Those are Real Men. Skilled and brave, tough, self-reliant and smart.
The best. I wish all of you could work with 'em, too. You’d see what I mean.
Well hell.
I’m over-fricking-joyed about the capture, but it means that Bush will almost certainly win the election now.
You couldn’t plan it better.
(Of course the conspiracy theorist in my head says…)
This ends the Iraq controversy.
“It was an illegal an immoral war!”
“I got Saddam!”
“You lied about the WMD!”
“I got Saddam!”
“Hundreds of American and innocent Iraqi lives were wasted for no good reason!”
“I got Saddam! We won baby! USA! USA!”
I still think the war was wrong-headed, and won’t vote for Bush because of it, but that’s going to become an incredibly hard sell since Americans love a victory (and yes, we should all be glad Saddam is in captivity). It’s still too early to call this thing, but Bush goes from difficult to nigh-impossible to defeat what with this and the inevitable economic recovery.
It’ll take something big, unpleasant, and external to the Democrats and Republicans to knock Bush down now. Much as I hate Bush, I can’t wish for that.
This question is impossible to answer at this moment, as the Democrats haven’t decided on a nominee.
Currently, Bush is on an upswing (capture of Hussain, improvements in the stock market).
The question is, can the upswing last 11 months.
Damn, I was really hoping it would be a WMD cache. But getting SH alive is a great accomplishment after all these months.
Congratulations Bluesman and others who participated in the hunt!
May this strike fear in the hearts of all dictators.
Thanks, mazirian.
I think it’s too much to hope that much bad behavior will be modified by this, though. Iran and Syria will be wary, but not pacified by recent Iraqi history.
Exactly what I said:
**
[/QUOTE]
As far as Iraq goes, Bush’s numbers are about to shoot up. I’m talkin’ near-term, here, not late next year. Whether it holds on high or not is a different question, but the situation has greater potential to improve than to erode.**
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know exactly what happens next in Iraq, but in June, we turn over governance to the Iraqi Governing Council. This is positive, especially if the level of violence drops off sharply, as I expect it will.
Also, I have a fantasy that Saddam will tell us where EXACTLY the WMDs are, and then EVERY SINGLE PERSON that was anti-war will have been exposed to have had very bad judgement. I doubt that will happen, but I still believe the propostion. If you don’t, all I can say is, “What level of security clearance do YOU have?”
Can Bush win again? He just got a lot closer to it.
Let’s see: Saddam’s capture still leaves the fundamental intractability of a religiously and ethnically divided ‘nation’ where there ain’t no course to stay, because a destination has never been specified, so no course has ever been set to get Iraq there.
However, that’s more a middle-term problem, and it may well not blow up in Bush’s face until a year or more from now.
Right now, the question is, to what extent did the insurgency rely on Saddam at large for money, leadership, or inspiration? If his capture causes things to settle down, that’s a big W for Bush. If things continue to be ugly over there, the boost will be short-lived. I honestly have no idea which to expect.
The economy is another iffy area. It got a big bounce this past year when we all refinanced our mortgages at lower rates; it was like found money. Will that be a one-shot thing that wears off, or will businesses add enough jobs to get a positive spiral going? I honestly have no idea about this one either.
And a question: where did all that ‘found money’ from the refi boom come from? Did it represent a true increase in national wealth as a result of a structurally lower price of money? Or is there a price to be paid, somewhere down the road, either when the Fed increases interest rates and banks are stuck with all these long-term, low-interest loans, or when it doesn’t, but the ‘true’ price of money is higher than the rates set by the Fed? If the Fed is violating the laws of supply and demand, and continues to do so long enough, there will be a price, even if we can’t yet see it.
I’m a smart guy, but this all outruns my knowledge of economics. And it’s probably too big a topic for this thread anyway.
Just heard a good’un on TV: they’re calling Saddam the Ace in the Hole! How funny is THAT? 
I hope your expectations prove correct! But I disagree that handing over anything more important than a two-car funeral to the Iraqi ‘Governing’ Council is “positive”. Those clowns don’t represent anybody.
Bluesman, my friend, are you sure you really want to go there? We’ve been back and forth across this ground last spring on this board, including in a thread with your name on it. I know you know a lot of stuff the rest of us don’t, but I’m not sure a security clearance is any better of a trump card now than it was then.
I have to take issue with that statement. You can’t justify a war retroactively. If they found WMDs today, that doesn’t necessarily prove that the US had sufficient justification to start the war when they did, nor that it was done correctly. I myself am against the war but I’m still surprised they haven’t found anything.
Though I understand that the American public probably wouldn’t see it that way. I think I’ll have to put my money on Bush because so far, every single fear of mine involving Bush came true, and then some.
Friend, you must be on crack. Finding WMDs wouldn’t be justifying the war retroactively. It would prove the Coalition’s propostion that was made long before the war started.
Did it have to start when it did? Yeah, it did.
Was it fought correctly? Well, Napoleon, YOU try to pull off that feat of arms, and have some snippy know-it-all civilian critique your performance.
Jayzus.
NOT having a security clearance is rather less than that.
Remember, I didn’t JUST work in that building, I didn’t JUST hold that clearance. Iraq was my SPECIALTY. I KNOW.
And you know not.
Wow. You mean they feed bullshit propaganda like that to actual soldiers trying to do their jobs? Why? If I see a picture of Saddam wearing a suicide vest during his capture, I’ll eat my hat. And email a picture of it to Bluesman.
Moving this lovefest to Great Debates.
Do you own a necktie? Are you wearing it right now?
Dumbass.
For someone with “security clearance” you shoot your mouth off an awful lot about the things you supposedly know.
Loose lips causing nautical calamities and all. I sincerely advise you to not comment on sensitive material, even in a veiled or indirect matter, if you value your employment and/or your nation’s security at all.
And no. Finding a bushel of suitcase nukes addressed to Osama wouldn’t have justified the war. Proof before the war would have. Bush took a gamble on little to no good intelligence. Whether he wins or loses the bet, he still shouldn’t have made it.
I’m unreservedly pleased at the news of Hussein’s capture. I feel that people like bluesman and the ones he spoke of who took Hussein out of his hidey-hole deserve the credit for the capture. Bush does not. He sat in his office and gave orders, while others actually had the intelligence and the guts to do something. The latter earns my respect far more than the former.
However, I doubt that distinction will be made by many. Saddam is “the Ace in the Hole” indeed for Bush… and the efforts and courage of others have won Bush a great deal of political capital.
It doesn’t change the fact that the US and its intelligence community could not prove the existence of WMDs when they started the war. What I’m objecting to is the fact that Bush risked countless US soldiers, not to mention the stability of the entire world, based on a suspicion. Finding WMDs today will not change that fact. If I shot someone because I didn’t like the way he looked at me, and later find evidence he was a hit man hired to kill me, does that retroactively justify my action? No, I should still be convicted for murder because I had no right to gamble the guy’s life based on my suspicion.
So, how does any President get credit for anything? Giving orders and then sitting back and waiting for others to do the job is what presidents do. All of them. A President is the Chief executive.
Bush deserves as much credit as any of the people under him.