In Defence of Marxism-http://www.marxist.com
Workers International League-http://www.socialistappeal.org

The capture of Saddam Hussein


Editorial statement


Saddam Hussein has been captured. On Saturday December 13, US troops finally caught the man who had eluded them for months. His last hiding place was a miserable 8ft hole in the mud of a Tigris farm near the village of Ad-Dawr. Tired and disoriented, the former dictator of Iraq was found with arms and $750,000 in cash.

Like a prisoner of ancient Rome being dragged in chains through the streets as part of a triumph, Saddam was paraded before the television cameras, unkempt and with a scraggy beard. In an attempt to humiliate their fallen enemy, the new Romans showed pictures of him being examined by a doctor. In Baghdad, the occupation authorities showed, over and over again, these images.

The Americans could not conceal their euphoria. Paul Bremer, the imperial proconsul in charge of occupied Iraq opened the long anticipated press conference with the words: "Ladies and gentlemen, we've got him."

"This is a great day in Iraq's history. For decades, hundreds of thousands of you suffered at the hands of this cruel man. For decades, this cruel man divided you against each other. For decades, he threatened to attack your neighbours. These days are gone for ever ... the tyrant is a prisoner," he crowed.

Tony Blair hurriedly joined in the chorus: "Saddam has gone from power, he won't be coming back. That the Iraqi people now know, and it is they who will decide his fate."

Marxists have no sympathy with the man who ruled Iraq with a mailed fist, who murdered Communists and trade unionists, who gassed Iranians and Kurds, who massacred Shias and killed political prisoners with excruciating torture. But the words of the British and American imperialists reek of hypocrisy.

For years this same man was one of the West's best friends in the Middle East. Successive British and American governments financed and armed him. The poison gas that he used against the Kurds was sold to him by American companies at a time when his crimes against the Kurdish people were well known. Among the long list of western leaders who visited Baghdad to fawn on Saddam there was one Donald Rumsfeld, sent to Baghdad by President Ronald Reagan, a great admirer of his.

Robert Fisk recalled the excellent relations that had existed in the past between Saddam Hussein and the West:

"This was the man who was the honour guest of the city of Paris when Mr Chirac was mayor and when the French could see the Jacobins in his bloody regime. This was the man who negotiated with the UN secretary generals Perez de Cuellar and Kofi Annan, who had chatted over coffee to none other than the now US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, who had met Ted Heath and Tony Benn and a host of European statesmen."

There was no talk then of the evil crimes of this bloody dictator!

The Americans are crowing now, but what was surprising was not the fact that they captured Saddam, but the fact that they took so long to accomplish this feat. Our memories are not so poor that we cannot remember the numerous occasions when the talking busts on CNN solemnly assured us that the US air force had killed Saddam with its tremendous technology and pin-point bombing. This turned out to be just lies and propaganda - just like all the rest of what the lie machines of Washington and London tell us about Iraq.

In response to the guerrilla onslaught, the invaders have intensified their military activity, bombing and shelling indiscriminately.

In the end it was not high technology but the very old fashioned method of bribery and corruption that was responsible for the arrest of Saddam. It took the American army with all its resources eight months to capture the man they were so desperately hunting. It seems overwhelmingly probable that this was the result of the large sums of money that Washington has been offering to anyone who was ready to betray him.

Given the rotten and corrupt nature of the regime and its leading elite, this was not so difficult after all. More than one of the men who were previously unconditional supporters of Saddam while he held absolute power will now be offering their services to Messrs Bremer and Bush. These people have no principles but power and an acute nose for career openings.

If the Americans mean what they say, Saddam will be put on trial for war crimes in Iraq. They are preparing a show trial on a Nuremberg scale. The intended purpose is to shock and awe world opinion and the people of Iraq into acquiescing in America's criminal occupation of Iraq. Will they succeed?

Their aim will be to discredit Saddam and therefore provide some excuse for their rape of Iraq. It is clear that he offered no resistance, although he was armed. He may have been taken by surprise and had no time to react, or he may have been so demoralised that he had simply lost the will to fight. There was a kind of relief in his face. It is the relief of a criminal who is finally caught by the police. But Saddam is a very unpredictable man and he can still do the Americans a lot of damage, even when in chains.

There are a number of problems in the way of a big show trial, mainly the fact that the prisoner will presumably be allowed to speak. The Americans were obviously assuming that, once in their power, Saddam would simply break down and say whatever they dictated to him. "Talkative and co-operative," the Americans called him after his capture. But the next day they changed their tune and said he was not co-operating.

The effect of a public trial in Iraq - if it is ever held - can turn out to be an unpleasant surprise for the Americans. For it could mean that the role of the imperialists can be exposed before the whole world. Saddam Hussein could use such a trial to "spill the beans" on all his past dealings with the imperialists. It depends on Saddam Hussein, but if he decides to go down this road a public trial could backfire on the imperialists.

Blair and Straw have quickly added that they wish the trial to be held in Iraq "by the Iraqis". All this is completely hollow because if a trial is held in Iraq it won't be the Iraqi people who decide. They have no power to elect their own government. They have no say over what happens to the economy, so how can we believe that they will have the last word over the fate of Saddam Hussein. The US occupiers have a stranglehold over the police force, the justice system, etc. The Iraqi judges will simply obey the demands of the US imperialists.

What is involved here is not justice but vengeance of a most primitive kind. They want a trial in Iraq, and with this they try to fool world opinion. If the trial were held in some "international court" the US would have less say over the final outcome. If it is held inside Iraq they will be able to control the outcome. Further to that, in Iraq the death sentence can be applied, something which would be more difficult to justify outside Iraq. Thus it is a question of revenge. They want him executed but they don't want the odium to fall on themselves. They want top wash their hands of this decision, like Pontius Pilate who left it to the "masses" to decide. The hypocrisy of these people is revealed in the statement of the British Foreign Secretary Straw. He says that he is opposed ethically to the death sentence but, however, if the Iraqi courts decide to carry out such a sentence then he would accept it! Thus they would pretend that any such sentence would be the "will" of the "Iraqi people". Thus the whole thing is a farce.

The mood of the masses is contradictory. While many people will feel a sense of relief that the old dictator has gone forever, this will be mingled with a sullen resentment at the arrogance of the invaders. Robert Fisk reported the scenes on the streets of Baghdad when the news of Saddam's arrest was announced:

"I was amid the slums of Sadr City - once Saddam City - when a cascade of rifle fire swept the streets. I was sitting on the concrete floor of a Shia cleric who had been run down and killed by an American tank, amid Iraqis with no love for the Americans, and the gunfire grew louder. A boy walked from the room and ran back with news that Iraqi radio was announcing the capture of Saddam. And faces that had been dark with mourning - that had not smiled for a week - beamed with pleasure.

"The gunfire grew louder, until clusters of bullets swarmed into the air amid grenade bursts. In the main street, cars crashed into each other in the chaos. But this was momentary joy, not jubilation. There were no massive crowds on the boulevards of Baghdad, no street parties, no expressions of joy from the ordinary people of the capital city." (The Independent, December 15, our emphasis)

Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the top US military commander in Iraq, described Saddam as talkative and cooperative. Other officials, however, shied away from suggesting he has provided any useful intelligence immediately right away after his capture. During Saddam's arrest, US troops discovered "descriptive written material of significant value," one US commander in Iraq told The Associated Press. But the nature of these "significant" discoveries has not been made public.

What is very significant, however, is what is not being said - for example on weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). US officials admitted that the question of the existence of weapons of mass destruction, which - let us remind ourselves - was the central reason given by Bush and Blair to justify the invasion of Iraq - was "of secondary concern".

The reason for such unexpected reticence is quite clear. After months of searching they have found no trace of such weapons, and they doubt whether Saddam will answer the many unresolved questions about Iraq's alleged efforts to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons or his government's ties to terrorism. These issues will be addressed down the road, perhaps when interrogators have established a rapport with Saddam, according to the officials, who spoke only on condition of anonymity.

Saddam's interrogators were initially focusing on the former Iraqi president's ties to the guerrilla war, pressing him for intelligence about impending attacks and the locations of resistance leaders. The interrogators' immediate hope is that Saddam will supply a wealth of knowledge on the insurgency against the US-led occupation force and its Iraqi allies, officials said. But this line of questioning merely exposes the stupidity of the American intelligence officers, generals and politicians. They try to put the blame on Saddam because they are not prepared to accept that the resistance they are encountering is a popular resistance against a hated foreign invader.

The assumption that the capture of Saddam Hussein will solve all the problems is a foolish one. To begin with, this bedraggled, pathetic man, living in a hole in the ground with three guns and a load of dollars was not leading the Iraqi insurgency against the Americans. Throughout this whole affair, US diplomacy and intelligence has been exposed as uniquely incompetent.

In the end a US official had to concede that the manner and circumstances of Saddam Hussein's arrest makes it unlikely he was directing resistance forces in Iraq. The US army found no communications equipment, maps or other evidence of a guerrilla command centre at Saddam's hiding place.

"Given the location and circumstances of his capture, it makes it clear that Saddam was not managing the insurgency, and that he had very little control or influence. That is significant and disturbing because it means the insurgents are not fighting for Saddam, they're fighting against the United States," said Senator Jay Rockefeller, the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. US intelligence officials have previously said they believe Saddam was too concerned with survival and staying hidden to provide much more than symbolic leadership.

Far from making life easier for the occupying forces, the recent events can make it a lot worse. Before Saddam's capture, many Iraqis were saying that the one reason they would not join the resistance to US occupation was the fear that if the Americans withdrew Saddam would return to power. Now that fear has been taken away, the armed resistance will almost certainly grow, not diminish. The day after the capture saw three new bomb attacks against coalition forces. There is no reason to suppose this will cease.

Despite the capture of Saddam Hussein, the guerrilla war in Iraq will continue, with new bombings, killings and assassinations. The occupation forces are powerless to deal with this precisely because there is not one single operational centre, which they can eliminate by killing or capturing its leaders. They are faced with an enemy with as many heads as a hydra. No sooner have they cut off one than another two or three grow in its place.

The capture of Saddam Hussein may give Bush and Blair a temporary respite. It may give Bush the boost he needs to win the presidential elections, though even that is not quite clear. Many things can occur between now and the elections that can upset all Bush's calculations. But nothing fundamental has changed and none of the basic problems have been solved. The fighting will continue as before, or even get worse. There will be a constant stream of body bags returning to the USA and Britain. The bitterness of the conflict will produce atrocities and all kinds of horrors that will provide fertile ground for new acts of terrorism both inside and outside Iraq.

Let the imperialists enjoy their moment of triumph. It will not last for long. A new nightmare is about to begin, not only for the Iraqis but also for the people of Britain, the USA and the other countries that have got stuck in this bloody quagmire. Having sown the winds, imperialism will reap a whirlwind.

December 15, 2003.

See also:

The Iraqi quagmire By Fred Weston (November 18, 2003)
Huge increase in injured US soldiers in Iraq - but the Pentagon tries to hide the facts By Fred Weston (November 17, 2003).
Iraqi workers stand defiant against bosses and imperialist forces By Roberto Sarti. (October 28, 2003)
Iraq: Robbery is now just and legal By Roberto Sarti (September 24, 2003)
Misery likes company - George Bush has second thoughts on Iraq By Alan Woods (September 9, 2003)
Between Iraq and a Hard Place – An Occupation Gone Awry, and a “Job-Loss” Recovery at Home By John Peterson (September 2003)
Britain rocked by political crisis: It is time to transform the Labour Party! By Alan Woods (July 20, 2003).
'History will forgive us' or Mr. Bush’s Poodle Barks again By Alan Woods, (July 18, 2003)
Occupation of Iraq: trouble brewing on the home front By Roberto Sarti (July 17, 2003).

And double fuck you.

that's why it calls itself Bigfoot, not Bigbrains. Bravo- what a reasoned rebutal. Ha ha ha ha ha ha .

You'll hear the answer loud and clear next November when Bush is re-elected President of the United States. You marxists haven't got a clue and it will become more and more evident as time goes on. Marxism means death to all working people. See USSR. It won't happen again. We'll kill you first.

You're going to beat us off with your lips I guess. Suck out our vital juices and such.

man, what the hell are you talking about the new romans, the imperialists?? if you give other countries the power the united states has the world would be fucked. seirously everybody talks about how horrible bush is for the world but how many times do you see him murdering his own people? of course everybody wants to have peace but when you have a dictator like saddam how can you achieve this? do you think hes just going to say, um, oh sure ill resign my country to you. no hes not so the u.s. did what they had to. to remove a threat and a menace to the world, look at iraq, i just read an article that showed quotes from both supporters and those against the us, living in iraq. one woman said that her son now has a future, and one person said that iraq could have taken saddam down themselves and that it brings humiliation to iraqi people, but if they could do this why didn´t they? its disgusting how people can write such trash about the united states with only one point toward them, hate, and support for ideas such as communism with such leaders like stalin, i can see somebody saying negative things about hitler, or some one like him, but how you can discredit the united states after they freed two countrys and have been helping almost every country for the last 80 years!

>You're going to beat us off with your lips I guess. Suck out our vital juices and such

No. You're a marxist and you foolishly attempt some type of government takeover, I got no problem shooting you or whatever it takes to make sure you're like the little dog Rover, dead all over. Whether or not you're scared has nothing to do with it. Scared or not, try it and you're dead. That's not a threat, that's a promise.

These commies are a joke. We all wish they would try something, but don't ever expect it to happen. That's like waiting for Monsoon season in Charelston. They might huff and puff, but at the end of the day it's still just a lot of hot air.

Of course if they tried anything they'd be put down like two dollar race horse, and they know it.

But Marxists are notoriously spineless, and nobody in America has ever welcomed their politics, except for the few degenerate societal washouts that could never succeed under any form of rule.

America is safe from these clowns. Hell, my wife's getting me a new Taurus C.I.A. for Christmas to compliment the Glock 26 that I already pack. 30,000 other people just like me, right here in my State, are all armed to the teeth, just waiting for these pecker-nosed insurgent rebels to rise up...

Yeah, me too. I've been looking for a reason to saw off my Mossberg...

now you can shoot yourself in the foot. Like when you do when you shoot off your mouth.

How original! How witty! Did you think that up all by yourself Alfalfa, or did your kindergarten teacher, Mrs. Crabtree help you out?

That's what I love about your leftists ... your sense of humor. You're all such comical, dapper, brilliant, (/sarcasm off) insipid dunces.

At least put some effort into it. The EV level is waning today. Here, let me stoke things up a bit. How about a joke:

What the difference between Saddam Hussein and your boyfriend lover?

Answer: You boyfriend asks permission before coming out of the hole!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Or the cheetos crowd will throw salty snacks at you. Unless the revolution breaks out when Monday Night Football, a Britney Spears special, American Gladiators or Up Close and Personal With the Raiders Cheerleaders is on tv. Then you will be safe because they won't be able to tear themsleves away until Mom puts her foot down and says that it is after bedtime.

Our resident commie is absolutely correct. If you people are going to rise up and break your chains, please wait until after football season ends, or at least until a commercial. I wouldn't want to miss the excitement of it all. But I can tell you right now, if it happens during a playoff game or the superbowl, you're likely to see my irascible temper flare, and neither of us really want that, now do we?

But I don't think your commie commander, Meyer London, will be able to pull his fat, pock-marked buttocks out that chair quickly enough to pull off a revolt during a 5-minute commercial break, so let's plan the insurgency for the spring, shall we? Good, it's a date then, I'll pencil you in on my calendar...but not for Sunday...NASCAR!

Please tell them, Max, not to have their revolution while you are scheduled to come in for your Thorazene dose. You are late often enough as it is, and too many of the nurses and receptionists are calling in sick on the days when you are scheduled to come in.

Look at the one trick pony folks. Isn't it cute?

I mean it. You nasty revolutionaries try to pull off some shit during football season and we'll just have to skip the judge and jury and go straight for the execution...be back in time to see the Panthers win the Superbowl!

So far, about what, 45 years for the American Worker's Revolution.

I don't think there is a single solitary thing we need to worry about from the "talk the revolution to death" crowd.

If any one of them had a single ounce of courage, it would have happened by now. Not that it would have been successful; the 99.99995% of Americans who DON'T support you ridiculous commies would have beaten you to death with your own Little Red Books in short order.

Tell me, Meyer, what's it like to know your political philosophy is so completely and utterly washed up? A total failure? Murderous, morally bankrupt, and contrary to all human nature? That it was, in fact, stillborn?

Oh, but I'm sure yoou'll do it right when you're in charge, huh, Meyer? (Snicker snicker!)

It must SUCK to be you.

It's a real paradox - one of the reasons why the people were incapable of an uprising was the economic sanctions that totally screwed Iraq in the decade before this war.

Of course, if the sanctions were lifted, life would be easier, and then why would they rise up and overthrow Saddam? Ignoring the fear factor of living under a tyrant, Iraq would have a fairly high standard of living in Baghdad. (The rural areas would be broke, as is usual in the 3rd world.)

This is utter nonesense. Revolutions occur when:

1.) The citizenry are disgruntled enough to revolt

AND

2.) They have the means to revolt.

Revolution is quashed by:

1.) Strong, centralized, forceful govenment with bigger guns.

Revolution would probably not have ever occured in Iraq because the people never had the means and the government was a brutal dictator.

Revolution will never happen in America because the overwhelming majority of Americans are well fed, clothed, sheltered, and happy.

Minnie: "Revolution will never happen in America"


Let me tell you a story 'bout Minnie the Moocher...

Out of history class her teacher did boot her....

'Cause when they taught about Jefferson & Adams...

All Minnie could say was that it never happens....

HiDEE HiDEE HiDEE HI!

Max is talking about the revolution your cowardly anarchist and Marxist buddies are too busy wetting their pants to carry out: against the United States of America.

If you'd bothered to read your history texts, instead of majoring in Smoking Area, you'd know that the American Revolution was against the British Crown.

But please, continue posting in this thread.

Your stupidity is quite amusing. Thanks for the opportunity to point it out.

the chickenhawlk fatass keyboard hero is calling someone else stupid. Too funny.

You say that if any other country had the power that
the US currently has, then the world would be a miserable
place. Look at Saddam Hussein you says. He gassed his
own people. Bush never did anything as such.

Sir do you understand/realise who is making money from
this war? Ok just in case you were'nt aware, the oil
companies such as Haliburtan and such in which people
like Dick Cheney and others (like King Bush's buddies)
will reap benefits when the oil company starts to "rebuild"
Iraq.

Moreover, everyday since the resistance againsts
the US invasion/occupation of Iraq, many US soldiers
have either been crippled for life or killed. And who/what
are the US soldiers fighting for? For that answer please
refer to the previous paragraph.

So then basically Bush is not gassing but using other
more sophisticated methods to ensure the crippling
and slaughter of his own people, ie. the US soldiers
fighting for Bush and Company in Iraq.

Secondly, Bush and company are spending much effort
in ensuring that our *fundamental* liberties are
practically abolished. You have no guarantee today that
your phone conversation with your beloved is not being
recorded so that it may be used to lock you up in a
dark cell without a trial or due judicial process.

You see, you are missing out on a clear sign of the times
and perhaps of the past. Bush family including buddies
such as Reagan etc. helped install Saddam Hussein in
Iraq to uphold US "national interests".
national interests = Bush and company's oil invested money.
Do you think that Bush and his likes *clearly identify*
with criminals such as Saddam? So then Bush is another
version of Saddam--perhaps a more sophisticated/stupid
version, depending how you view Bush.

Have a nice day.

Let me tell you the story of Minnie the Moocher

And her little friend Fido the Poocher...

They never let inconvinient facts get in their way...

As long as they say what Republican tell them to say....

HiDEE HiDEE HiDEE HI.......