It Would Have Been A Bargain...

[dgridley]

Saddam Hussein offered to step down and go into exile one month before the invasion of Iraq, it was claimed last night.

Fearing defeat, Saddam was prepared to go peacefully in return for £500million ($1billion).

The extraordinary offer was revealed yesterday in a transcript of talks in February 2003 between George Bush and the then Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar at the President's Texas ranch.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...ews.html?in_article_id=484162&in_page_id=1811

Considering the lives lost and expense in HUNDREDS of billions of dollars spent pursuing the war in Iraq, one wonders, if true, why we didn't take Saddam up on his offer?

 

[James]

Oil.

I'm not American and don't get much coverage expect people saying
"Pull them out, screw American" (Australian troops)
That kind of gets on my nerves. We help America, They help us. Even if it is wrong, We need America.

 

[dezinerite]

Considering the lives lost and expense in HUNDREDS of billions of dollars spent pursuing the war in Iraq, one wonders, if true, why we didn't take Saddam up on his offer?

From the same page: "It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction."

Hmmm...that's a bit suspicious though...

 

[lpstong]

The 1 billion dollars, wouldnt that equate to something of ransom money. I thought in some aspects that during any form of hostage like talks, really no negotiation. I could be wrong. But I see it as Hussein thinking he would be a hostage. So why not do a hostage negotiation.

United States: Ok, Ok Hussein what do you want?

Hussein:
--I want $1 billion dollars in unmarked small bills. Wait, wait. Make them real small. All in $10's, $5's and $1's. And throw in a roll of quaters. I need some for the laundry and parking meter.
--And could you throw in a Happy Meal from Mickey D's. Make it a six piece nugget and diet coke, I'm on a diet.
--And a helicopter for my escape into exile. Equipt it with some nuke missles for protection which I will hide and or sell(taking bids for $1 billion for each missile)
--And give me a 5 day spread between your infantile troops and myself. No looking of where I run to either.

United States: If we give you these things will you lead us to all your WMD?

Hussein: Oh sure no worries. I will tell you after you buy the nuke missile on my tricked out, cherried out helicopter. Taking bids for $1 billion.

United States: Oh, one more thing. All the food for oil, you know the food for oil program ran from the UN. Where is all the food the UN gave you?

Hussein: We sold it back to the UN who divided it up between, France(cause they really needed it), Germany and a few others in exchange if they called you, the US, "infantiles"

***comment just purely for jokes

I would think maybe this is how the negotiations could have gone. Maybe? Maybe not.

 

[Kate]

Fearing defeat, Saddam was prepared to go peacefully in return for £500million ($1billion).

It would have been a huge bargain for sure, but somebody had to prove he could finish daddy's job

 

[mwzd]

Considering the lives lost and expense in HUNDREDS of billions of dollars spent pursuing the war in Iraq, one wonders, if true, why we didn't take Saddam up on his offer?

Countries really should NOT negotiate with terrorists...irrespective of their faith / country / influence. The results of letting dangerous people go has always been bad for the world. Terrorists let off by one country, to save however many lives, cause harm to that country and to other countries.

People guilty of mass murder can only be given a death sentence. Negotiating with them is morally reprehensible. And no country / government / people should even be seen negotiating with them

And if people start believing they can get away with anything, we set the stage for a worldwide state of chaos and anarchy.

 

[dgridley]

I agree with you to a point, but in retrospect, looks like we may have gutten the short end of the stick.. and by "we", I would certainly include the Iraqis in that statement.

As part of the deal, I might have asked that Saddam leave office as we impose an interim governmet to attempt to ensure a relatively bloodless and smooth transition. I'm not sure that this could have been done, but I'm also not 100% that Saddam, rather than Osama, should have been a priotiry. I tend to agree that oil and pride were the motivators, and not a "war on terrorism". Were that our aim, seems like countries that more or less openly support terrorist views should have been ahead in queue.

And, of course, one condition would have been no taking of WMD info.. that would have been ludicrous.

Here's something to think about as well:

Instead of sending HUMANS to Mars 11 times, the USA sent them on a Mission to Iraq
Way back in the day (2004), President Bush promised to send people to Mars. NewScientist reported that the cost of the mission was "expected to cost $40 billion to $80 billion". That really seemed like a lot of money.

A year earlier, in 2003, Bush sent his country's soldiers into Iraq. It is believed that as of September 27, 2007, the war in Iraq has cost the USA a whopping 454 Billion dollars! (and here's even a more pessimistic estimate reported at The Boston Globe in 2006)

If the original Mars estimate was accurate, that means that instead of going to Iraq, the USA could have funded somewhere between 5 and 11 independent human missions to Mars! By "independent", I mean Mars mission programs that start from the ground up, and do not leverage each other's technology, research, or manufacturing. In reality, it would be much more likely that technology advances would be shared, as well as NRE costs, lowering the mission costs for all involved. That is, many many more than 11 missions could have been sent.

http://burtonmackenzie.blogspot.com/2007/09/instead-of-sending-humans-to-mars-11.html

Meanwhile, there are Americans sitting here without food, medical insurance, public transportation, etc. all in the name of bringing "democracy" to a country that never asked for it in the first place. Maybe we should bring some of that democracy back home where it belongs, eh?

Countries really should NOT negotiate with terrorists...irrespective of their faith / country / influence. The results of letting dangerous people go has always been bad for the world. Terrorists let off by one country, to save however many lives, cause harm to that country and to other countries.

People guilty of mass murder can only be given a death sentence. Negotiating with them is morally reprehensible. And no country / government / people should even be seen negotiating with them

And if people start believing they can get away with anything, we set the stage for a worldwide state of chaos and anarchy.

 

[mwzd]

Yes, but isn't that true of any country in the world?

Defence budgets of each major country could easily bring their people out of poverty. However, in this day and age, might is right...even if the meek will eventually inherit the earth, today you need guns to protect home and country.

The whole point of making a deal with these people is that it makes you appear weak to a whole bunch of lunatics who are willing to go to any length to mess your world as soon as they see chinks in your armour. And that, my friend, is a surefire recipe for disaster.

It is believed that as of September 27, 2007, the war in Iraq has cost the USA a whopping 454 Billion dollars!

What's the going rate of human life? Or a hundred thousand or even a hundred million, cause that's what at stake. 454 Billion to protect 250 million Americans, not to mention a few billion people elsewhere.

I don't think it's only about oil, I think we discussed that wars for oil are stupid, specially since we should be looking for / finding fuels that are eco friendly and automatically regenerated, including wind, water and solar.

I know soldiers are dying and it looks totally meaningless, but someone has to do it, just think, if Europe had gone to war with Hitler early enough there might have been able to save six million Jews.

And believe me, this ain't over yet, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets any better.

 

[Robert Allen]

It would not have been a bargin. It would cheaper to invade and take the oil.

By giving saddam another $1billion, it is almost like giving up.

If you are getting invaded, you normally win, if you invade others, you normally lose.

It is not always the case, but normally this is true.

Rob

 

[happyhappy]

Looks like Saddam lost his head on that one...

It would not have been a bargin. It would cheaper to invade and take the oil.

By giving saddam another $1billion, it is almost like giving up.

If you are getting invaded, you normally win, if you invade others, you normally lose.

It is not always the case, but normally this is true.

Rob

 

[loko123]

even if he went into exile, maybe someone else would have taken his place, and beside paying someone to surrender makes you appear weak, just imagine the scandal if such a thing would had been discovered by the news.

 

[BrandonG]

Requiring WMD info and $1,000,000,000? I wonder how many WMD's could be created with 1 billion dollars. Hmm....

 

[neroux]

but somebody had to prove he could finish daddy's job

:D

Countries really should NOT negotiate with terrorists

Apart that such an offer seems ridicioulus to me (since when do we pay politicians to leave their positions? How much should we pay Bush or Sarkozy? Or how much was Blair paid?), which terrorists are you referring to?

 

[mwzd]

since when do we pay politicians to leave their positions

You think Saddam qualifies as a politician? Must be the AK47 amendment...

which terrorists are you referring to?

Any terrorists, if you had a local bully in your area who insisted on throwing bombs into your house what would you do?

Of course you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[loko123]

you are right!, he was just sadistic dictator. who knows what kind of atrocities he commited in his whole life.

 

[lpstong]

We also need to remember it was Husseins people who had him on trial. Iragi people had tried and convited him. So apparently they saw a need to remove such a person. And since it was a dictatoral government most likely the next person in line would have been one of his sons. And so the cycle would have been repeated.

It may not be democracy they need. But at least a change of government and people who run it. It will take by some historical and political views at least 5 generations to flush out current beliefs.

To me from the daily news reports amidts the death counts on both sides. That someone wants more of their people in government control. So regardless of what some people say or view. There is a small change going on. Many Iragi can and will have hopeabout their government) even if it is not going to be immediate.

War will always be expensive. Freedoms will always come at a cost. Money is only a temporary matter. And the issues here at home(US) have been going on for years and decades. Why is it people look at the wrong things in their country when a war goes on. Why are the issues addressed prior. I mean in a loud manner.

And dont get me stated on Hillary. Her socialistic form of health care requires you to have a job in order to get health insurance. Hmmmmmmm....Way to go there Hill. So many may say there are politicians working on things at home. But how hard are they really working on it other than to get a vote.

 

[ThiSoul]

It's kidna too late to discuss about saddam now :S

 

[neroux]

You think Saddam qualifies as a politician? Must be the AK47 amendment...

Any terrorists, if you had a local bully in your area who insisted on throwing bombs into your house what would you do?

Of course you are entitled to your opinion.

Sounds rather like a description of Bush, except that he isnt even a local bully but already a remote one.

 

[uber]

It amazes me how little the CIA etc can do.... I mean how hard could it have been to have said " sure Saddam... here's your cash" and then have the plane taking him to exile hijacked and flown into a Mosque?

Seriously.... you can never be held to ransom... no matter how much it costs.... anyone remember that chap getting off a plane waving his bit of paper after his nice little chat with Mr. Hitler?

 

[neroux]

It amazes me how little the CIA etc can do

Apart from hijacking innocent citizens they are also quite good in drug trafficking.

Seriously.... you can never be held to ransom... no matter how much it costs

I dont see a ransom in there.