Preacherman
Member
From the Opinion columns of the Times, London (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-653775,00.html):
April 21, 2003
Who cares if Saddam was only all shook up?
Tim Hames
Is Saddam Hussein the new Elvis Presley? This is the issue disturbing sections of the Bush Administration. Will they ever be able to prove that he definitely died when four 2,000lb bombs were dropped on his favoured restaurant a fortnight ago, or will his whereabouts always be a mystery?
Can the military campaign be considered a complete success while these questions remain unanswered? Will there be constant rumours of sightings, occasional cryptic messages, or a chat show on Abu Dhabi television?
It has to be conceded that there are, indeed, similarities between Saddam and Elvis. A mutual interest in firearms, for instance. The interior design of some of those presidential palaces is eerily akin to that of Graceland. And if Saddam managed to scramble away before the American warplane arrived, only to witness the fall of Baghdad two days later, then he may have been inclined to adopt Are You Lonesome Tonight? as an appropriate personal theme tune afterwards. It is not impossible that the deposed tyrant will follow the former king of rock into folklore.
His fate has not, admittedly, bothered most commentators recently. The same pundits who were insisting three weeks ago that it would take the US Army an eternity to reach the Iraqi capital are now complaining that, because of some looting, the failure to remove rubbish immediately from the streets and the apparent desire of certain Shia Muslims to be ruled by the local version of Ayatollah Khomeini, that it was not worth the effort to liberate it anyway.
They appear to be horrified, not by the discovery of torture chambers, but the reports that a museum was ransacked. This is rather like objecting to Bomber Harris’s efforts in Dresden on the ground that an art gallery was one of the buildings flattened. If Saddam is alive, then he must be in danger of dying laughing.
In fact, it does not matter much whether or not he is still with us. If he did get out of the restaurant, despite the efforts of what must have been one of his inner circle to make certain that it was his last meal, then his first reaction will surely have been that of irritation. After all, allowing for the speed with which the US military struck, the chances are that he didn’t even make it to the dessert. Then again, he might have ordered the Ice-Cream Bombe and got more than he expected.
Furthermore, conventional dining etiquette is that tips are supposed to be something that you offer after consuming food, not offered about you well before sitting down at the table. One wonders what his last words might have been in such circumstances (“waiter, there’s a ceiling in my soup,†and so on).
But if he did emerge unscathed and is today on the run, then his options are limited. A dictator without his dictatorship is a political eunuch, the ultimate emperor without clothing. Other members of the club; Idi Amin, Baby Doc or Pol Pot are hardly encouraging precedents. One of the peculiarities of absolute rule by the single person is how completely it collapses when it is concluded. Big Brother is cut down to size as Small Irrelevance. He would be a rather pathetic figure.
It is also not clear where, if anywhere, he could travel. He could not risk staying inside Iraq and allowing the Americans a third shot at eliminating him. It has been suggested that he might have dashed for Syria, but if he reached Damascus the authorities there would not want him parading about and providing George W. Bush with the perfect excuse to launch an attack on them. He would be obliged to pack his bags and head elsewhere — but who on earth would have him?
Even if some regime did take him in, it would want to do so in secret and then insist that he kept his mouth shut, abandoned any political ambitions and found things to do that would not attract attention, such as working as a local radio presenter or writing for The Independent. He would not, despite what many in the White House fear, be able to threaten the new Iraqi leadership.
In fact, although American officials do not see it this way, there would be advantages in Saddam Hussein spending his last years stuck in a villa on the North Korean coastline. The contrast between the total power he once wielded at home and his fugitive status there would be stark and compelling. It might be a rather more sobering example to others at the helm of rogue states than the thought that he had met a swift end while he was chomping couscous. What dictators fear most is not death but the humiliating removal of their painstakingly acquired trappings of office.
The same rules do not, though, apply to terrorists. While Saddam’s health is of no real consequence, that of Osama bin Laden is enormously important. An organisation, unlike the machinery of a state, can follow a leader into exile. One of the distinctive features of al-Qaeda is the cult status it awarded to its founder. If bin Laden is dead, then to a very large degree al-Qaeda is dead, too, and others would find it extremely difficult to revive it. If he is alive, then his supporters have reason to carry on the struggle and there is the possibility, albeit modest, of future outrages.
While the attention of the world has been on Iraq, therefore, the intensification of the search for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and Pakistan has passed virtually unnoticed. It is not in the President’s interests to provide it with publicity but it is a huge priority for him. The end of the war on Iraq will lead not to fresh assaults on others in the Axis of Evil but a return to the War on Terror. The Americans do not have to prove that Saddam Hussein is dead, he can become a full-time Elvis impersonator in a karaoke bar for all it matters.
They would dearly love and, in truth, desperately need, to demonstrate that Osama bin Laden’s days of making tapes are over.
April 21, 2003
Who cares if Saddam was only all shook up?
Tim Hames
Is Saddam Hussein the new Elvis Presley? This is the issue disturbing sections of the Bush Administration. Will they ever be able to prove that he definitely died when four 2,000lb bombs were dropped on his favoured restaurant a fortnight ago, or will his whereabouts always be a mystery?
Can the military campaign be considered a complete success while these questions remain unanswered? Will there be constant rumours of sightings, occasional cryptic messages, or a chat show on Abu Dhabi television?
It has to be conceded that there are, indeed, similarities between Saddam and Elvis. A mutual interest in firearms, for instance. The interior design of some of those presidential palaces is eerily akin to that of Graceland. And if Saddam managed to scramble away before the American warplane arrived, only to witness the fall of Baghdad two days later, then he may have been inclined to adopt Are You Lonesome Tonight? as an appropriate personal theme tune afterwards. It is not impossible that the deposed tyrant will follow the former king of rock into folklore.
His fate has not, admittedly, bothered most commentators recently. The same pundits who were insisting three weeks ago that it would take the US Army an eternity to reach the Iraqi capital are now complaining that, because of some looting, the failure to remove rubbish immediately from the streets and the apparent desire of certain Shia Muslims to be ruled by the local version of Ayatollah Khomeini, that it was not worth the effort to liberate it anyway.
They appear to be horrified, not by the discovery of torture chambers, but the reports that a museum was ransacked. This is rather like objecting to Bomber Harris’s efforts in Dresden on the ground that an art gallery was one of the buildings flattened. If Saddam is alive, then he must be in danger of dying laughing.
In fact, it does not matter much whether or not he is still with us. If he did get out of the restaurant, despite the efforts of what must have been one of his inner circle to make certain that it was his last meal, then his first reaction will surely have been that of irritation. After all, allowing for the speed with which the US military struck, the chances are that he didn’t even make it to the dessert. Then again, he might have ordered the Ice-Cream Bombe and got more than he expected.
Furthermore, conventional dining etiquette is that tips are supposed to be something that you offer after consuming food, not offered about you well before sitting down at the table. One wonders what his last words might have been in such circumstances (“waiter, there’s a ceiling in my soup,†and so on).
But if he did emerge unscathed and is today on the run, then his options are limited. A dictator without his dictatorship is a political eunuch, the ultimate emperor without clothing. Other members of the club; Idi Amin, Baby Doc or Pol Pot are hardly encouraging precedents. One of the peculiarities of absolute rule by the single person is how completely it collapses when it is concluded. Big Brother is cut down to size as Small Irrelevance. He would be a rather pathetic figure.
It is also not clear where, if anywhere, he could travel. He could not risk staying inside Iraq and allowing the Americans a third shot at eliminating him. It has been suggested that he might have dashed for Syria, but if he reached Damascus the authorities there would not want him parading about and providing George W. Bush with the perfect excuse to launch an attack on them. He would be obliged to pack his bags and head elsewhere — but who on earth would have him?
Even if some regime did take him in, it would want to do so in secret and then insist that he kept his mouth shut, abandoned any political ambitions and found things to do that would not attract attention, such as working as a local radio presenter or writing for The Independent. He would not, despite what many in the White House fear, be able to threaten the new Iraqi leadership.
In fact, although American officials do not see it this way, there would be advantages in Saddam Hussein spending his last years stuck in a villa on the North Korean coastline. The contrast between the total power he once wielded at home and his fugitive status there would be stark and compelling. It might be a rather more sobering example to others at the helm of rogue states than the thought that he had met a swift end while he was chomping couscous. What dictators fear most is not death but the humiliating removal of their painstakingly acquired trappings of office.
The same rules do not, though, apply to terrorists. While Saddam’s health is of no real consequence, that of Osama bin Laden is enormously important. An organisation, unlike the machinery of a state, can follow a leader into exile. One of the distinctive features of al-Qaeda is the cult status it awarded to its founder. If bin Laden is dead, then to a very large degree al-Qaeda is dead, too, and others would find it extremely difficult to revive it. If he is alive, then his supporters have reason to carry on the struggle and there is the possibility, albeit modest, of future outrages.
While the attention of the world has been on Iraq, therefore, the intensification of the search for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and Pakistan has passed virtually unnoticed. It is not in the President’s interests to provide it with publicity but it is a huge priority for him. The end of the war on Iraq will lead not to fresh assaults on others in the Axis of Evil but a return to the War on Terror. The Americans do not have to prove that Saddam Hussein is dead, he can become a full-time Elvis impersonator in a karaoke bar for all it matters.
They would dearly love and, in truth, desperately need, to demonstrate that Osama bin Laden’s days of making tapes are over.
