I hate to bring war/politics up on the board.....

Well they should capture Bush too... I don't like either of them.

Damn the moron Shrub.. something good starts to happen for me and he has to ruin it.

Although Saddam's capture is truly heartening news, I do hope that the U.S. doesn't end up setting up a government in Iraq that becomes yet another dictatorship. I have a feeling that many will feel the Iraq problem is now taken care of, and once the country reaches some degree of normalcy (in relative terms), we clear out, only for someone worse to emerge. If you look at U.S. history in international affairs over the past 50 years, we do not have a great success rate in these situations.

On a less positive note...I figure that now we'll end up with Bush for four more years. At least the Avenue Q lyric will remain current.

---

Erik -

Not sure what you are responding to in my post...My tone is not generally optimistic, despite this considerable achivement.

---

Ah! OK. Wasn't sure what part of my post you were responding to. Still, I expect that Bush's approval rating will shoot up after this, in that typical jingoistic American fashion.

---

I was happy to find this thread. I've been unnerved by the coverage of this story all a.m. This whole air of triumph feels like the Bush ship landing, the posed turkey picture. Such a capture is historically more significant, to be sure, but it's being used as a symbol of the success of Bush's power trip. I hate to be cynical, but it's hardly the "end" of an era for Iraq or us. The problems there, the insurgents' attacks, guerilla warfare and day-to-day terrorism, the corruption, the manipulation of the spoils of war by Halliburton and others -- all of that will remain, as fresh, more complex problems are created.

We went to war to remove a supposedly direct threat to US, after the Bush admin make repeated erronious connections to 9/11. The capture of one tyrant UNrelated to our terrorists attacks -- how does that translate into a safer America, no matter how good it is for Iraqi people? I'm no isolationist, but I see this capture as a blip -- and sadly, possible provocation for more loss of American life, less stability for that country as more factions fight harder to be in charge (and get rid of the occupiers--US), i.e. ultimately nobody's concept of "peace."

---

Ya, I went to bed at 3:00 am and woke up at 8:00 am to see Freeman from FAME perform, but nooooo...Sadam had to be captured. If I saw that clip one more time!!

---

Of course, it is very convienient that Saddam, despot that he undoubtedly was, just happened to be sitting on the second-largest oil reserves in the world.

It's nice that the world is rid of one tiny tin-pot dictator. But there are far worse dictators the U.S. can't be bothered with, as they don't have anything we want to steal.

---

Does anyone else suspect a "Wag the Dog" type of diversionary tactic here with Sadam's capture happening just days after the revelation of the alledged Halliburton debacle?

---

I'm with Donel...although I was thinking more along the lines of "just in time for the holidays" maximum-good-will impact.

Trust no one, Mr. Mulder.

---

I loved reading all these posts about timing, about the power of the image. No one denies that a monster has been removed. But this is not a video game. The complexity of reactions must be studied. In today's TImes there is an eye-opening view ofhow this is being seen in the Arab world. Some, in major denial, see Wag the Dog. Some just see major Arab humiliation. This man wasn't taken by his own people-- he was grabbed by "occupiers." We can debate what it means to US forever; how that part of the world sees this coup at our hands is another matter. And no matter what anyone says, perception is critical.

---

well, wag the dog and all the other conspiracy theories aside (my mother is sure that they were keeping saddam in the same spot where they held vince foster's body...next to jimmy hoffa), the biggest thing that this will do id force a re-evaluation of saddam's myth in the arab world. while he was seen as a bully and a braggart and a hundred other bad things in the arab world, he was also seen as the guy who was willing to stand up to the u.s.

the method of his capture, however, goes a great way towards dispelling this myth. while his sons went down like heroes in some arab eyes, fighting valiantly against the "crusaders," saddam went with a whimper. after all his bravado of swearing he'd never be taken alive, he handed over his pistol and walked out. they didn't even bother with handcuffs. a line which will be repeated throughout the muslim world (and i don't know how this will ultimately play) will be his response to a shia member of the governing council mowaffak al-rubaie's, "why didn't you fight?" saddam gestured towards the americans guarding him and said simply, "would you have fought them?"

the humiliation that comes from him being captured by "infidels" will, i think, be outweighed in the muslim world by yet another example of a leader whose brash words energized and exhorted others to give their lives but who when the time came for him to live up to that ideal was unwilling to make the same sacrifice that he demanded and even required of others.

just my 38 1/2 cents...

---

Saddam wasn't caught by suprise.

Everything about the way he looked and his resignation leads me to believe he was held captive for quite a while.

This is not as neat and clean as the press is making it out to be. And I don't think for a minute his capture will mean no more dead soldiers.

---