US In Secret Surrender Talks With Saddam's Cronies [Dictating Terms]

Geostrategy Direct.com ^ | Week of April 1, 2003 | Bill Gertz

[ewing]

United States in Secret Surrender Talks With Saddam's Cronies

The most serious dialogue yet has been established between Iraq and the United States.

United States officials said that a channel has been opened during the past four days and for the first time Washington is relaying messages on its terms for an Iraqi surrender.

_Full Text, Subscribers

[ewing]

So is Saddam dead or alive? (or ailing)

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Hmmmm.

[Guillermo]

Who is "Geostrategery direct" if I may ask ?

[shezza]

Yes.

[ewing]

It's Bill Gertz ('Inside the Ring' military reporter from the Washington Times) newsletter website.

Drudge has him on frequently as a guest on his program to discuss intelligence and military matters

[duckman]

It's not a secret anymore.

[Semper Paratus]

Given the how Iraq has fought the war this week the trustworthiness factor is on par with Daschle's bi-partisanship.

[WarrenC]

Prayers for Iraqi surrender to happen very soon.

[ewing]

Guess not..

[ewing]

It would be best, if the Republican Guard tries to use chem weapons Baghdad will look like Berlin circa 1945

[Guillermo]

Yes, I've heard of him.

Thanks for the info. Gertz usually seems to have pretty good info.

[Ga Rob]

So that website is run by Bill Gertz?? The info is his?? If so I may have to check that out.

[Fulbright]

The boss is alive; the talks may be a ruse while they finish tightening the bolts on their first H-bomb.

[VoteHarryBrowne2000]

I would be more inclined to make it look like Dresden or Hiroshima. Fighting with concern for civilians will lead to more deaths in the long run. Unleash our military's full fire power.

[capydick]

Jimmy Carter negotiating on behalf of the Raqi's........

[ewing]

Or the chem attack..

[dark_lord]

Actually, if they do use chemical weapons on our troops, we gain the political high ground, which is very useful for the post war situation. We will be able to show that not only do they have WMD, but that they used them -- in violation of Geneva convention to which they are signatories.

No need to incinerate Bagdad - WMD are pretty worthless against properly equiped troops (ours). They are considered "area denial" weapons. It will stop us from advancing for a couple days until the chemicals break down - and we have to avoid any low points in the terrain (mustard gas is heavier than air.) But our troops are well defended against chemical WMD.

So -- then the UN has to shut up, we win anyway, the "arab street" has to shut up, we win anyway, France and Germany look like idiots, we win anyway. HAHAHAHA!

[sinkspur]

Did Iraq sign the Geneva Conventions?

[dark_lord]

Yes.

Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (The Geneva Protocol):
Opened for Signature: June 17, 1925
Entered into Force: February 8, 1928
Ratification Advised by the U.S. Senate: December 16, 1974
Deposit of U.S. Ratification: April 10, 1975
The Geneva Protocol prohibits the use of all asphyxiationg, poisonous, or other gases; all similar liquids, materials, or devices; and all methods of bacteriological warfare during war.

Signatories (includes Iraq).