Posted on 02/23/2017 8:05:13 PM PST by nickcarraway
CIA officer John Nixon sums up his role in Iraq during the US occupation. His first mission was to gather as much information as possible about Saddam Hussein, and then sent to Baghdad to help search for him.
When the US forces finally captured him, Nixon said that he had prepared “a list of 30 to 40 questions that he felt that Saddam was the only one who could answer.”
“To be honest, the moment I saw him, I knew that it was him and I did not have any doubts about it,” he added.
Nixon has spoken of his history with Saddam during Al Arabiya’s Point of Order program with Hasan Muawad due to be aired on Friday.
Nixon spent all his time in Iraq interrogating Saddam in captivity. He later wrote a book entitled ‘Debriefing the President: The Interrogation of Saddam Hussein’ in which he talked about his experience with the deposed president as a CIA interrogator.
“I think what really mattered to Americans is one or two key issues; everything else was insignificant. The US wanted to know if Iraq had weapons of mass destruction because that was why we first got there,” Nixon said.
However, at the end, they did not find any weapons and Nixon said that “this is embarrassing because what they were searching for turned to be unreal and rather a mere excuse. They were looking for anything that would justify their excuse, and they would disregard everything that would prove them wrong.”
“Saddam Hussein was very compliant during the investigation and most of what he said was true,” added Nixon.
Regarding the secrets and motives behind Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, Nixon said: “Saddam admitted that he made a mistake in this regard, and that was the peak during the interrogation, because Saddam did not like to admit that he was wrong. However, when we started to talk about Kuwait, he held his head between his hands and said that this gives him a severe headache every time. This was a clear message that his invasion of Kuwait was a mistake that weighed on his mind and still does, years after the invasion.”
As for the attack on Iraqi Halabja that was inhabited by Iraqi Kurds, Nixon said: “This subject made Saddam lose his temper, and this scared me. Saddam said that he was not responsible for the attack and asked me to ask Nizar al-Khazraji who was the field commander, in charge of the military operation.”
“Saddam was very angry and when he later on discovered what happened in the land that was under the control of the Kurds’ who were allied to Iran, he was afraid that the latter would fiercely stand up for what has happened and urge the media to cover it, and this alone would have caused great damage to Iraq at the international level.”
Regarding his opinion about handing Saddam to his opponents in the government after the occupation, Nixon said: “I think that was a mistake, I have felt very bad about how they dealt with him. We were all aware that Saddam, and after his detention, will be tried and most likely be sentenced to death. Saddam was also well aware about that, more than anyone else. What happened was the execution was varied out in a barbarian rule at night in the basement of a government building. This was disgusting because it destroyed any prior justification to wage the war.”
When asked about the US forces’ role during the trial, Nixon said: “It was a good time to implement the judicial proceedings in Iraq. However, Nouri al-Maliki’s government had deliberately intervened behind the scenes by threatening the judiciary, withdrawing their bodyguards and expelling them outside the Green Zone, which basically, was equivalent to a death penalty against them. This is what enabled the US forces to get the verdict they wanted.”
Did he say how he liked his hole in the ground?
Taking Saddam out was a stupid move that basically gave Iraq to Iran and now allows them to concentrate their efforts on Israel and us. This stupidity spread to Libya taking out Omar. These two goons were bad no doubt but they kept the even more evil idiots in their country at bay...
I wish Mr. Nixon would go back and read what the NY Times wrote in 2014: “The article by Times reporter C.J. Chivers focused on U.S. soldiers who suffered from exposure to the sulfur mustard and other nerve gases which emitted from the bombs. According to the story, about “5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs” were found scattered across Iraqi soil. The U.S. government buried the cases from both the public and the troops. As a result, injured soldiers did not receive proper medical treatment.”
It is amazing what a stupid adventure this turned out to be. Thank you George W. Bush!
And we should believe anything Saddam said, why? I would not believe anything that lunatic said, anymore than Goering after WW2, or, frankly, any serial murderer.
CNN was more supportive of Saddam Hussein and his human rights abuses than they were of “G.W.Bush’s” alleged human rights abuses in Iraq.
The perps at Abu Ghraib were already under criminal prosecution at the time their activities became front page news in the US press in a presidential year. It was page 1 news on the NYet Times for 30 days.
CNN was quite about Saddam’s policies of torture, abuse, and murder to maintain their Baghdad bureau.
Our press is aligned with the enemy.
The big stink about “wiretapping” international calls with foreign agents of terror was because Time Magazine had journalists in direct communication with Al Qaida. It is referenced in a Frontline documentary.
Queer how that type of wiretapping was used to expose Flynn in Trump’s administration.
I used to be able to recall which journalist (Peter Jennings?) and another were in a roundtable (or townhall) discussion about the role of journalists, ethics, etc. (saw it on youtube). One browbeats the other to concede that if the journalist were to become aware ahead of the fact of an imminent planned attack on our troops, he should not and would not notify our side of the plan.
More fake news.
I remember reading the SIGACT and BUA reports on mustard and nerve agent IEDs.
The author also pimps the canard of the war being waged to remove WMDs. The actual use of force resolution was about Iraq’s continued violation of UN resolutions, sanctions and inspections much of which were aimed at eliminating and verifying Iraq’s removal of WMD programs.
The fact that Saddam’s chemical and nuclear weapon programs were shipped to Syria and Libya at the start of GW2 in 2003 should not be overlooked.
The war accomplished its overall objective of ending Iraq’s WMD programs and removing Saddam and the Ba’athists from power. People who think we shouldn’t have invaded are ignorant of Saddam’s Ba’athist party (Sunni supremicism) and its intent to use WMDs. The remnants of Iraqi Ba’athism make up the core of ISIS. It is the same supremicist ideology only under the guise of religion after its loss of national sponsorship. Everyone knows what ISIS is capable of. Now imagine if they had a nation and NBC WMD programs at their disposal. That was Saddam’s Iraq.
I call BS on this one. Saddam's local military commander probably didn't have the authority to release chemical weapons on his own. The statement reeks of Saddam trying to pass-the-buck on this to avoid the hangman's noose down the line. He didn't know what was in store for him after the interrogations, but correctly assumed that there would be a trial. The last thing he would want is to confess to a capital crime.
Yep. Plus, just because you are an “interrogator” doesn’t mean you don’t suck at your job.
Well said!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.