 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
July
31, 2003, 9:00 a.m.
To achieve our goal of a free Iraq, Saddam is just as valuable on a mortuary slab as he would be in a jail cell, spouting off to the BBC and the New York Times. Saddam dead can't incite fear or stir unrest. But Saddam humiliated — put before a court of Iraqis who have the power to sentence him to death — would be just as good. What we must not permit is Saddam before any court that either would not proceed quickly or that would not have the power to sentence him to death. A prolonged spectacle could only become an anti-Coalition propaganda exercise for radical Islamists to use to their benefit. All of that is not to say that we shouldn't take Saddam alive if the chance presents itself, and if to do so won't cost more than the benefits we can gain. If we can, what is it worth to take Saddam alive? Though it seems that we will find Saddam sooner rather than later — the capture of one of his most senior bodyguards earlier this week bodes well — he has instincts that must be the envy of every cornered rat. His will to survive — and the money to buy cooperation — has kept him free for months, literally since our spec-ops guys began doing their thing around Tikrit and Baghdad even before the March invasion began. By now, he must be enormously tired, and emotionally breached (in spec-ops terms, so messed up in his mind that clear thought is no longer possible). And for the few people who have hidden him out of loyalty or fear, the gamble on Saddam has longer odds each day. So what do we do when we find him? Last Sunday, I debated former Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska on MSNBC. Gravel thinks we messed up by not taking Qusay and Uday alive, and that it would have been a simple matter to do just that. Why not surround the house and give him the Noriega treatment, blasting them with loud, incessant rock music, Gravel argued. Why not lay siege to the house and simply wait them out? Why not send a SWAT team in? To a small degree, even Mike Gravel is right. Iraqi National Congress leader Ahmad Chalabi and Sir Jeremy Greenstock, former Brit ambassador to the U.N. and soon to be their ambassador to Iraq, have all come out in favor of taking Saddam alive. But I part company with both Gravel and Chalabi, because they omitted one crucial thought that Greenstock did not. Greenstock said to the Daily Telegraph: "I would like to see him brought before a court, but that is in the hands of the military team looking for him." Because Saddam is just as valuable dead as alive, we must not spend lives unnecessarily just to take him alive. Task Force 20, a
combined force that has been hunting Saddam for months, may get lucky.
If the spec-ops guys can get there fast enough — as they should have
when Qusay and Uday were found — they may be able to force entry
and take him without much risk. If that option presents itself, the small
risk may be worth it. But if the spec-ops guys don't get there fast enough,
or if other forces on the scene think it's likely he'll slip away, or
if he and his companions decide to fight, then the decision has to be
left to the on-scene commander just as Greenstock said. Which means Saddam
dies. For each mass grave we put in evidence, for each raped woman and disfigured man, for each of the thousands of Kurds who died in the chemical-weapons attack on Halabjah, there would be hours and days of denials, and calls for us to produce Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. There would be accusations of war crimes by the Coalition, and demands for testimony by Messrs. Bush, Blair, Powell, Straw, and others. Those who dream of a public-relations bonanza in a trial of Saddam may, instead, give one to him and our other enemies in the region. If Saddam surrenders, or can be taken without great risk, take him alive and try him. If not, Saddam delendus est. — NRO Contributor Jed Babbin was a deputy undersecretary of defense in the first Bush administration, and is now an MSNBC military analyst. He is the author of the novel Legacy of Valor. |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
hould
we capture Saddam Hussein alive? This question is being tossed around
the media these days as if it were some academic exercise. Those who argue
most stridently for taking the Frank Buck "bring 'em back alive"
approach don't seem to care that we're not talking about a noble beast
like a Bengal tiger: We're talking about a murderous dictator, a war criminal
who still may dream of a return to power. They also fail to realize that
taking Saddam alive is not our principal goal.
