Iraqi Regime May Have Tried to Surrender, But US Bombed Instead [paleo lunacy]

Lew Rockwell ^ | 4/23/03 | Paul Clark

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Last week in these pages I argued that U.S. unconditional surrender policy and refusal to negotiate with Saddam Hussein had cost hundreds of Iraqi civilian lives and led to the despicable atrocities such as the loss of priceless and irreplaceable 5,000 year old artifacts. See "Unconditional Surrender leads to Atrocities."

Well, now ABC News has uncovered the "smoking gun" (or in this case, the smoking ruins of a house) showing that the U.S. in fact did everything possible to prevent a negotiated surrender. "Missed Opportunity? U.S. Attack May Have Ended Saddam Surrender Attempt."

According to ABC news, Hussein sent his head of intelligence, Gen. Taher Haboush, to meet and to try to work out a surrender deal with a tribal chieftain who had previously worked with the CIA. After Gen. Haboush, left the house of the intermediary, the chieftain apparently tried to get in touch with his CIA contact on a satellite telephone and mentioned the name of Gen Haboush. U.S. military intelligence apparently intercepted the call and sent in an air-strike to bomb the house. ABC reports that the chieftain and 17 of his family members died during the attack, but Gen. Haboush escaped uninjured. The incident reportedly occurred on April 11.

This incident only underscores two facts, which were probably already well established. First, the Pentagon simply had no interest in a negotiated surrender. They were more interested in killing Haboush than in negotiating with him Secondly, U.S. forces were homicidally "trigger happy" and would drop bombs on houses when they really had no idea who or what was in them. The U.S. may not have deliberately targeted civilians, but on the other hand, the Pentagon never would go too far out of its way to protect civilians when they were in the line of fire.

A few weeks ago, the Pentagon made a great deal out of Iraqi forces apparently pretending to surrender, but then firing on U.S. soldiers when they came to accept the surrender. The Pentagon called that a war crime. Is the Pentagon going to characterize it as a war crime to kill people who were trying to surrender, including dropping a bomb on a house full of civilians?

April 23, 2003

Paul Clark (send him mail) is a veteran of Desert Storm and holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy. He is currently Director of Coalition for Local Sovereignty in Washington.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

More stupidity from our Paleocon "friends". This was mightily over the top, so I flagged it as "humor".

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Tooth grinding ping.

[Lazamataz]

Iraqi Regime May Have Tried to Surrender, But US Bombed Instead [paleo lunacy]

Lew Rockwell is completely, merrily insane.

[topher]

I suppose these same folks would have argued with a "negotiated surrender with Adolf Hitler and the Japanese as well.

Unconditional surrender means what it says. Saddam had a chance before the deadline...

[Poohbah]

Lewser needs a more current picture, showing his straitjacket.

[TopQuark]

First, the Pentagon simply had no interest in a negotiated surrender. They were more interested in killing Haboush than in negotiating with him Secondly, U.S. forces were homicidally "trigger happy" and would drop bombs on houses when they really had no idea who or what was in them.

This friend of Buchanan is just as much off-the-cliff.

While they fancy themselves being on the right, everything they say is supported by the Left. The perception of our leaders as monsters is only comparable to the anti-War parades.

These paleos are actually anti-American as the LEft.

[Dane]

Amazing, I guess this writer also thinks that Hans Blix was making progress with negotiations with saddam.

Whew, the above article only proves that there are people stupid enough to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.

[JohnGalt]

This is merely commentary on a report by ABC news...could you clarify which part is stupid?

I would focus on the clear delineation between promoting this theory and the converse theory that a surrender was worked out prior to commencement of hostilities that allowed Saddam and his crew to escape-- that theory was mentioned on Fox News and reported on Chronicles Website, using British Intelligence as its source.

[Catspaw]

Fwap fwap fwap...the usual lunacy from the lewser website.

Thanks for the laugh, Chanc :-))

[JohnGalt]

What are you talking about? In the course of four weeks paleos watched otherwise mainstream conservatives begin to support wars for "liberating oppressed people?"

Its you folks who drank the kool-aid.

We have been outcasts all along.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

They had many chances.

He who hesitates is lost.

In war.............he who hesitates ........is dead!!

[TopQuark]

What are you talking about? Clearly not about htis:

In the course of four weeks paleos watched otherwise mainstream conservatives begin to support wars for "liberating oppressed people?" Reread the post.

[SunStar]

More Brown/Red lunacy.

[MJY1288]

AW SHUCKS, I bet they were about to hand over the weapons of mass destruction as well?

Lew Rockwell shouldn't fall for Baghdad Bob's post @sswooppin propaganda

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I can hear them now - "Hitler and Tojo really can't do anything to us over here. We're getting entangled - we should let them divide up the rest of the world, the trade routes, the resources, the industrial base, and give them lots of time to arm up. We'll be safe!"

[Chancellor Palpatine]

The man would be an excellent Fifth Napoleon at the nuthouse poker game.

[kesg]

Unconditional surrender means what it says. Saddam had a chance before the deadline...

He had many, many chances before the deadline. He had 12 years worth of chances before the deadline. I can't believe that these clowns are whining that we didn't offer the Baathist Saddamites a negotiated surrender.

[CatoRenasci]

WTF is the "Coalition for Local Sovereignty"? Sounds like some lefty garbagio to me.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

And here Hansel was doing such a great job, considering the testimony that is coming out.

[NeoCaveman]

Lew Rockwell shouldn't fall for Baghdad Bob's post @sswooppin propaganda

One believes what they want to believe. Lew has his own "facts" and will stick to them, no matter how far from reality.