IF Kurds caught Saddam, Kerry and Lieberman are done

[mouse7]

"Saddam was held by Kurdish forces, drugged and left for US troops
Sat Dec 20,11:00 PM ET

LONDON, (AFP) - Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was captured by US troops only after he had been taken prisoner by Kurdish forces, drugged and abandoned ready for American soldiers to recover him, a British Sunday newspaper said.

Saddam came into the hands of the Kurdish Patriotic Front after being betrayed to the group by a member of the al-Jabour tribe, whose daughter had been raped by Saddam's son Uday, leading to a blood feud, reported the Sunday Express, which quoted an unnamed senior British military intelligence officer.

The newspaper said the full story of events leading up to the ousted Iraqi president's capture on December 13 near his hometown of Tikrit in northern Iraq (news - web sites), "exposes the version peddled by American spin doctors as incomplete"..."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20031221/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_saddam_britain&cid=1514&ncid=1480

If this is accurate, this could doom the Kerry and Lieberman campaigns. Both campaigns invested a lot of energy and political capital into negative attacks based on the original version of events surronding Saddam's capture. Both camps went out of their way to praise Bush administration's leadership regarding Saddam's capture.

I personally believe these campaigns were wrong to attack a fellow Democrat and praise a neo-con for anything in the manner they did this week. They probably don't care what little old me thinks, but little old me isn't the one scrubbing the yolk from his face this morning. You would think from past history of practically everything that has happened regarding Chimp-ordered military action they would have waited a few days to make sure the GlOPs' story was remotely connected to the real story.

Well, Kerry and Lieberman didn't wait. Now they are both hung out to dry on the record being enthusiatically supportive of another Dubya lie. Dean next speech will be one of the easiest to deliver in the history of American politics...

Potential Dean Quote: "...Gee... we aren't more secure than before Saddam was captured because... um... let's see... we didn't even capture Saddam? Yeah. That's it...."

I have a feeling Dean will be a tad more articulate than that. You get the drift, though. Clark will slide through this mess because Clark didn't go overboad on the "Must stop Dean to prevent universe from imploding" rhetoric. Clark will say something like "See all the time and effort having friendly allies from places other than Micronesia in the field with your forces can do for the home team yadda yadda yadda...."

Kucinich will offer to let the Kurds to the whole damn Iraq thing. At the moment, that's not the weakest of positions in a debate round.

I have also GOT to hear what Rev. Sharpton has to say. By the time the primaries come around, Sharpton may get more votes than Kerry and Lieberman put together.

[Cheswick2.0]

1. Kerry seems to have joined Joe in the Bush camp

and Gephardt too. They are digging their own graves.

[KoKo]

2. I don't know if this story will even be reported except on Yahoo. C-Span

interviewer was reading from NYT's article this morning all kinds of Bush Spin details about how Saddam was captured and there was nothing about this story, that I heard, I turned it off and did a check of CNN, MSNBC and didn't see anything scrolling. They will say the story is from "Arab Free Press" and not to be believed, I think, unless the British mainstream newspapers go with it.

Not sure whether this could just be propaganda from AFP, too. It's surprising that Yahoo picked up on it and is asking their viewers if they want to add "AFP" to their homepage. Seems they are trying to be more balanced, I guess.

[sasquatch]

3. The Kurds did catch Saddam, it's just that the whore media won't say it

Anyone with the sense god gave a cockroach could see that he was being held captive. The troops went and got him because Bush needed it for his photo-op. You see this is supposed to be "put a boot in their ass Bush, the little brother of Jesus Christ" that Karl Rove put's in front of the media. The real Bush though is a dry drunk, cokehead, bed wetting coward and the media doesn't wan't the American people to know that.

[BlueEyedSon]

4. My BS detector was humming a little

for most of this story, just like it did for the US version. That is, until I got to this part:

An unnamed Western intelligence source in the Middle East told the Express: "Saddam was not captured as a result of any American or British intelligence. We knew that someone would eventually take their revenge, it was just a matter of time."

My BS detector went dead silent. This paragraph has the ring of truth.

[robbedvoter]

5. I hope this story is on LBN - very important, we need to advance it

I am talking about the Saddam/kurds story - not your attacks on Kerry.

[mouse7]

6. It's on LBN.

Been there a few hours now. now both the Yahoo and Sunday Herald articles have threads there.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=279094&mesg_id=279094

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=279095

[AfroLib]

7. True, True

Sidling up to the Bush-Hog will not turn around the sagging campaigns of the more conservative Dems. Go Left!!! for victory.

[RetroLounge]

8. It's on Bloomberg too

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aUBP42FLX880&refer=us

[DemOutWest]

9. No, it means that

the American People were lied to again. We still need a new President with Foreign Policy experience (and domestic issues experience).

Doesn't change a thing. Isn't this a post and attack on fellow Dems. (maybe not Joe Lieberman).

DemOutWest

[mouse7]

10. More a response to candidates who released the attack dogs

I guess I don't have to point out there have been far more Presidents elected with no foreign policy experience. Between the Governors and Generals that never left the Continental US, Presidents that enter the White House with Foreign Policy are far rarer. Most recently, Clinton and Carter have been quite effective (with the exception of hostage situations in which the GlOPs are actively working against the elected President). History books clearly working against you on the foreign policy experience claim.

[TorchTheWitch]

12. couple problems here

I guess I don't have to point out there have been far more Presidents elected with no foreign policy experience. Between the Governors and Generals that never left the Continental US, Presidents that enter the White House with Foreign Policy are far rarer. Most recently, Clinton and Carter have been quite effective (with the exception of hostage situations in which the GlOPs are actively working against the elected President). History books clearly working against you on the foreign policy experience claim.

You can't be a General having never left the US... the military doesn't work that way.

While it is true that few Presidents have won elections that have foreign policy experience, a sitting president in a time of war has NEVER been unseated without it. In fact, I can't think of any president that was unseated during a time of war by ANYONE with or without foreign policy experience. If you think foreign policy experience isn't going to be vital this go-round, you're fooling yourself. Foreign policy is THE issue for this election. Body bags ALWAYS trump wallets.

[mouse7]

13. Sure there were... Washinton, Jackson, Grant... that era.

Lets see... Because of Vietnam, LBJ quit before he lost the party nomination to RFK, then RFK was assassinated and Humphrey got the nomination by default.

Foreign Policy experience will not be a big issue because key players in the Clinton Foreign Policy team are clearly ready and willing to serve in the next Dem administration. Dean has already asked for Pres. Clinton to lead a team to negotiate the Isr/Pal mess. Hard to argue that. I wouldn't be surprised to see all the candidates suggest that before it's done.

The experience isn't the question. The policies are. All the candidates but Lieberman have pretty respectable foreign policy platforms. Israel seems to control Lieberman's agenda too much, and he seems too willing to keep US troops in ME forever.

Kerry's problem now is he's spending too much time apologizing to the base for support of Dubya. Between the war vote, and now attacking Dean on the Saddam capture when we now find out we didn't even capture Saddam is just too much baggage.

[agingdem]

11. Give me a break!

How does it affect Kerry? The Bushies lied...AGAIN...and that's the story.

[mouse7]

14. Because Kerry immediately supported Dubya for capture

All kinds of praise to the White House for capturing Saddam, and all kinds of attacks by Kerry on Dean because Dean said nothing different after Saddam captured.

Kerry jumped in the Saddam Captured boat with Dumbya with both feet, and Kerry's going to sink in that boat now that we find out that it was all a lie like the weapons of mass destruction and Jessie "Rambo" Lynch.

[agingdem]

15. I guess...

he, like us, should assume that every word out of the Bushie machine is crap.

[bigtree]

16. I don't get the link between praise for the capture of Saddam

and your alleged Kerry embrace of the Bush regime.

Haven't you heard? Kerry is going to run against Bush if nominated. He opposes the Bush approach to Iraq. He has expressed specific differences with Bush's approach to Iraq. He has been consistent in his belief that Saddam should be removed from power, preferably with international involvement to lessen the sense of a soley American endeavor. He shouldn't have to be sad or neutral about the benefits of Saddam's capture. Hopefully it will hasten an end to our involvement there.

[mouse7]

17. Kerry's having a REALLY crappy day.

First the Saddam capture operation turns out to be another big Dumbya lie. The Kurds, not Americans captured Saddam, possibly days, weeks or months before the announcement. Kerry fawned all over another big GlOP lie.

Then after Kerry rakes Dean over the coals for daring to suggest we weren't safer after Saddam's capture, Tom Rigge schedules a press conference to declare Howard Dean psychic and increase the terrorist threat level/color/thing.

Somebody buy the man with the long face at the end of the bar a drink. He needs it and he just hocked his house, so he's too broke to buy it himself.

[bigtree]

18. the man with the long face

looks rather confident on CNN's Blitzer report.

Says Bush's foreign policy isn't making America safer. Says the capture of Saddam doesn't aquit Bush's handling of foreign policy.

"We are safer with the removal of Saddam Hussein," he says. "To confuse the two (Saddam and foreign policy overall)shows a lack of understanding about foreign policy," he says

Blitzer makes the 'Saddam's capture of Saddam as an example to other despots (Libya). Kerry disagrees. He says the unilateral invasion made the world less safe.