Iraqi 'secret surrender' negotiations under way

CNN ^ | March 12, 2003 | Barbara Starr

[chasio649]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. officials told CNN Wednesday that "secret surrender" negotiations have begun with key Iraqi military officials in hopes some military units will not fight U.S. and coalition forces should there be a war.

Communications with these Iraqi military officials are not being handled by the Pentagon, but instead by other "elements" of the U.S. government, the officials said.

[Jeff Chandler]

I noticed that Rumsfeld is the left's latest pinata.

[paul51]

This is the reason Pres Bush is content to play with the UN for awhile. Everything around Saddam is turning to dog doo and will only make the operation easier. We may never have to fire a shot.

[Spruce]

*

[sourcery]

Talk about "smart weapons." Ours are getting to be so smart, they talk enemy military units out of fighting in the first place! Problem is, they let the whole world know what they're doing, including the enemy leadership. Oops. Maybe not so smart, after all.

[ARCADIA]

Saddam is likely to kill most of his senior officers within the next couple of days. This story is intended to encourage him to purge most of his command structure just days before the war starts.

[CatOwner]

"This is the reason Pres Bush is content to play with the UN for awhile. Everything around Saddam is turning to dog doo and will only make the operation easier. We may never have to fire a shot."

Shots will have to be fired, if you want Saddam removed. The "surrender" of the frontline troops is a great ploy for Saddam to slow us down. Imagine the logistics of having to deal with 100,000 Iraqi frontline troops surrendering on day one. Once we tag and ID them, we should be well into Hillary's first term.

[sourcery]

This story is intended to encourage him to purge most of his command structure just days before the war starts.

Now why'd you have to go and give the game away like that? Don't you know people are trying to play with Saddam's head, and here you go spoling the whole charade :-)

[spodefly]

Maybe. Either way, this is good psyops ... he can either worry that he has potentially mutinous commanders going into battle, or kill them all and start over just a few days before battle ... either way, he is screwed.

[lorrainer]

Iraqi 'secret surrender' negotiations under way; France now asking how it can be of assistance. Film at 11.....

[The South Texan]

Just send the French in to talk to these Iraqi military guys. The French wrote the "Idiots Guide on how to surrender."

[paul51]

The "surrender" of the frontline troops

I think the cracks might spread a little further than the frontline. His generals know the end game is near. I'd bet that some of the communications involve them. Someone is going to get him.

[CatOwner]

"Someone is going to get him."

I can live with that.

[Billthedrill]

Communications with these Iraqi military officials are not being handled by the Pentagon, but instead by other "elements" of the U.S. government, the officials said.

Hokey smoke, we didn't sic the IRS on the poor guy, did we? Bush has finally gone too far...

[goodnesswins]

ROFL...yeah...sic the IRS on 'em...that'll really do them in.....oh, how we wish. (Or , how about the Dept. of Environmental Protection....or, or, the Department of Education...that's it..) LOL.

[paul51]

I can live with that

Likewise, even if we have to give another scumbag 27 million

[SuziQ]

To the dismay of the U.S. officials involved, the secret effort was first publicly hinted at Tuesday by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

Huh? There was something on FR last week about the US sending e-mails to Iraqi military commanders. I'm assuming those e-mails were more than just to forward the latest internet jokes!

[Burkeman1]

Jeesh what crap. Sadaam will not surrender (we have said we aim to kill him). If he has WMD he is giving them away right now to be used against us. If he has a nuke he wold have tested it and then we would treat him like we do North Korea- like an equal.

[Illbay]

You sound like the "conservatives" in 1992 who were trying to say that not voting for Bush 41 was a "smart move" since it let Clinton win, and then everyone would see how lousy he was, then we'd get a "real conservative" in 1996.

[CatOwner]

Sorry to disappoint you, but I voted for Bush Sr. twice. You may not like what I have to say, but it is what my gut tells me at this time. I pray that Bush Jr. proves me wrong.