"These are the real looters"

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/22/international/middleeast/23GORDON.html

Lifestyles of the Rich and Infamous
By MICHAEL R. GORDON

RESIDENTIAL PALACE, Baghdad — As American and British forces prepared to invade Iraq, the workers at Saddam Hussein’s presidential compound here were hard at work on their own secret war preparations: removing the ornate furniture from Mr. Hussein’s palaces to hide it until after the war.

While the allies were preparing to unleash their missiles and bombs, Mr. Hussein’s aides were busy establishing a strategic reserve of handsomely upholstered sofas, fine china, wall hangings with pastoral scenes, and wall-sized mirrors decorated with cherubs. A label was affixed to each of the items explaining precisely where it came from right down to the very floor and room.

In terms of aesthetics, the furniture seems to be a foreign despot’s misguided attempt at sophistication. Mr. Hussein and his colleagues, it seems, dwelled in a world in which excess was the norm, no expenditure was too extravagant and ostentation was substituted for good taste.

But the cache also provides a window into the Mr. Hussein’s strategic calculations — or more accurately his miscalculations. Mr. Hussein and his colleagues, it seems, were expecting to ride out the war in their bunkers and to return afterward to their former life of splendor. They were not only expecting to endure the allied bombardment; they were hoping to retain the seat of power along with all of their furniture and imperial trappings.

After fighting the Americans in the 1991 Persian Gulf war and surviving four days of American air strikes in 1998, Mr. Hussein and his deputies had a good sense of what structures would be high on the allied target list (the leadership’s offices and residences, airfields and other military assets) and which would be off limits (schools, mosques and civilian neighborhoods.)

So, they planned accordingly.

In the Amiriyah section of Baghdad I met an Iraqi aviation engineer who told me that the government had decreed that the engines be removed from all of Iraq’s jets at the international airport. The airport, in fact, is dotted with engineless airplanes. (Two were turned into burned-out hulks anyway by over-eager American troops determined to deprive the regime of any chance to escape.)

The military did much the same. The Iraq Air Force buried entire aircraft in its western desert to try to hide them from the Americans. Tanks were buried near Al Kut. Weapons and ammunition were hidden in the nation’s schools.

The leadership applied the formula, too. Mr. Hussein’s Abu Ghurayb Palace was stripped of its furniture. Paintings were even removed from their frames. (The Americans fired a cruise missile into Mr. Hussein’s vacant palace bedroom anyway.) There is also the $656 million dollars that was found hidden in a gardener’s shed and in other modest buildings in Baghdad, a cache that the Iraqi power elite clearly planned to recover one day.

Mr. Hussein’s presidential palace here — a sprawling compound that has gone from being the nation’s power center to a furniture warehouse — is another case in point. For the regime’s loyalists life was good. This was not just a government installation. It was a planned community for the elite on the banks of Tigris, with parks, swimming pools, Disney-like castles, moats, and man-made pounds plied by paddleboats.

Brig. Gen. Sayyad Yassen, a Republican Guard commander, was one of the favored few. He had a home in the compound with a swimming pool, a sauna, and a river view.

American troops found $16 million today in another house across the street, and an officer said there could be much more. A white Mercedes with a bullet hole in the front passenger window was parked outside.

“These are the real looters,” said Sgt. First Class Greg Walker, who took me around in a Hummer.

General Yassen’s home was filled with beds, an indication that soldiers bunked there with the intent to defend the regime. The Special Republican Guard, which was charged with defending the capital, however, seems not to have made much of a fight once it was clear that the American armor was on the way. Some Republican Guard troops left their uniforms in their lockers and their boots by their cots. For soldiers determined to avoid the American prisoner of war camps, army boots seem to have been a decided liability.

The abandoned uniforms suggest an answer to one of the great riddles of the war: what happened to the Iraqi Republican Guard? In one of the fastest demobilizations in history, the Iraqi troops that escaped the American bombing appear to have cast off their military gear and tried to blend in with the civilian population.

"You could say the Iraqi Army has us surrounded,"said Col. Martin Stanton, a senior officer at the land war command for civil-military relations. “They are lining up each day looking for work.”

These days, the presidential compound is an American headquarters — M-1 tanks rumble along the avenues; soldiers have turned one of the buildings into a indoor shooting range; other soldiers have make the generals’ homes temporary camps.

The Pentagon’s Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, which is charged with overseeing the rebuilding of Iraq and the establishment of a new government, is setting up its office in a hall the Iraqi Foreign Affairs Ministry used for official functions. The office is just short walk from the stockpile of fine furniture, much of which seems to be have been built in France.

I wandered through the rooms with an Arab-speaking officer. Some of the pieces, he explained, were from the Republican Palace, others from the Huraa Library and the Mothers of All Battles Hall. There was even a splendid chair with finely stitched cushions. Its label indicated that it have been removed from the “special corridor.” That, my guide, told me seems to be a reference to the quarters formerly occupied by Mr. Hussein himself.


And I read on this board how “sanctions” were the cause of the depolarable condition suffered by the Iraqi people! So, we should have lifted the sanctions and given more aid so Saddam and his cronies could have the good life? Last time I give any modicum of credit to those posters on GS prattling on about sanctions!

Peace To All Who Read This…

Re: "These are the real looters"

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by mrpockets: *
**So, we should have lifted the sanctions and given more aid so Saddam and his cronies could have the good life? Last time I give any modicum of credit to those posters on GS prattling on about sanctions!
*
[/QUOTE]

IF anything, your article proves that the sanctions were having adverse effects upon millions of civilians, while benefitting Hussein and his close circle. If the plight of suffering civilians does not serve as sufficient justification (in my opinion it does), then the embargo should have been removed over a decade ago based upon the reason that it was benefitting the regime.

Re: Re: "These are the real looters"

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *

IF anything, your article proves that the sanctions were having adverse effects upon millions of civilians, while benefitting Hussein and his close circle. If the plight of suffering civilians does not serve as sufficient justification (in my opinion it does), then the embargo should have been removed over a decade ago based upon the reason that it was benefitting the regime.
[/QUOTE]

Beg your pardon, but, how did sanctions "benefit" Saddam and the regime? So, because Saddam was going to do what he wished either way we should have ignored and rewarded it? Your position does not seem tenable! Maybe you have another UN report supporting your position, no offense intended?

Peace To All Who Read This...

Re: Re: Re: "These are the real looters"

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mrpockets: *
Beg your pardon, but, how did sanctions "benefit" Saddam and the regime? So, because Saddam was going to do what he wished either way we should have ignored and rewarded it? Your position does not seem tenable! Maybe you have another UN report supporting your position, no offense intended?
[/QUOTE]

No offence taken, Mr. Pockets.

>>Beg your pardon, but, how did sanctions "benefit" Saddam and the regime?<<
Under the embargo's structure, millions of people in Iraq are allocated monthly food rations (i should say they 'were' allocated these rations; subsequent to the invasion, this has ceased). The rations (comprised of some amounts of sugar, oil, tea, flour, rice and lentils, i believe) were picked up by Iraqis at numerous distribution centers across the entire country. Through the 'oil-for-food' programme, the government of Iraq was responsible for distributing these rations (note that northern Iraq was the exception; the UN distributed rations in that part of Iraq; southern and central were handled by the former government of Iraq).

>...because Saddam was going to do what he wished either way we should have ignored and rewarded it? Your position does not seem tenable!<<
My position is that Hussein and his government were able to wield more power because it was they who were responsible for distributing the monthly rations to millions of civilians, on a monthly basis, under the 'oil-for-food' system. The distribution system, according to the UN's Office of Iraq Programme, was one of the most effective in the world. It also gave Hussein more power - afterall, it was him and his government that were distributing monthly rations to millions of destitute and near-destitute civilians, for several years.

Your article, infact, proves my assertion - for all the talk of Hussein's palaces, swimming pools, of Uday's (or is it Qusay's?) fascination with vulgar art, of the white Mercedes, so on and so forth - this was the cumulative consequence of a decades-long sanctions upon Iraq. What type of effects did the embargo have upon the ruling elite of the country, the ones whom it was allegedly supposed to affect ? None whatsoever. The ruling elite lived as lavishly - if not more - as they were accustomed to. It was the poor, the crippled, the widows and the under-five year olds who suffered the most through this genocidal tool. Hence IF for no other reason than this, the sanctions should have been completely lifted over a decade ago.

Re: Re: Re: Re: "These are the real looters"

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
My position is that Hussein and his government were able to wield more power because it was they who were responsible for distributing the monthly rations to millions of civilians, on a monthly basis, under the 'oil-for-food' system. The distribution system, according to the UN's Office of Iraq Programme, was one of the most effective in the world. It also gave Hussein more power - after all, it was him and his government that were distributing monthly rations to millions of destitute and near-destitute civilians, for several years.

[/QUOTE]

So, just to clarify, Nadia, you feel that the sanctions enhanced rather than degraded Saddam and his government in the eyes of Iraqis? Do you feel that the sanctions might actually have prolonged his reign? Or, that lifting the sanctions would have had any impact on his power besides positive, allowing him to claim another glorious "victory"?

Not to sound in the least callous, but, all that would have done was given him more, and possibly a little fatter, victims. ( I will concur that it's probably easy for me say, not having lost a friend or a loved one because of poor nutrition or lack of medicines due to sanctions. Be that as it may....)

However, it is also quite evident that Saddam had more than sufficient resources to care for his people and, could have easily resolved the circumstances he, and he alone, created.

Either way Saddam wins - with sanctions in place, he's seen as an underdog standing up to the "corrupt" Western nations; by lifting sanctions, he gains a victory, claiming he was "right all along"!

Not to put words in your mouth, but, you seem to be saying that since Saddam wins either way, it was the world's responsibility to be humanitarian and ensure that the Iraqi people did not suffer because their leader was selfish and delusional?

That would have been the equivalant of Chamberlin appeasing Hitler following the "annexation" of Austria. As I'm sure you know, Chamberlain, England's Prime Minister at the time, attempted to intervene, resulting in the treaty of Munich being signed by England, Germany, France and Italy. The world knows the result - it didn't work.

Evil can only survive and prosper when good men stand silent and do nothing. While I can weep with those who lost a wife, husband, child, brother, sister, cousin or friend to the evil that was and is Saddam, that stand needed to be taken and maintained. You ask that we turn a blind eye...

Mercy is in the eye of a soldier who lowers his gun, rather than firing upon a poor soul who doesn't want to die. It is the trait of an individual, a human connenction - it has never been a trait ascribed to governments or nations that I am aware of.

We may share many of the same gut feelings, but, see different resolutions to the problem. Were I able to save a life of another human, from any nation, race or religion, at the loss of my own, I would like to think that I would do so. But, that's personal, emotional , connected - not political, not policy.

As I read the stories of Iraqi's digging for the bones of their relatives by "numbers" to give them a proper Islamic burial - as I read of the tortures he practiced up to within days of the war - the more I feel that our actions in this war were and are justified.

I believe we're on different sides of the fence seeking the same ultimate goal...

Either way, may God bless the Iraqi people, and, finally, grant them peace and prosperity - they have certainly earned it!

Peace To All Who Read This....

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "These are the real looters"

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by mrpockets: *
*
...may God bless the Iraqi people, and, finally, grant them peace and prosperity - they have certainly earned it!**
[/QUOTE]

i do not agree with the majority of the sentiments in your post, but i will eagerly agree with the above. Ameen to that.

"the struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting ~ M. Kundera"

If you disagree with the majority of my sentiments, I fail to see the relevance of your quote...

Peace To All Who Read This...

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by mrpockets: *
*
"the struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting ~ M. Kundera"
If you disagree with the majority of my sentiments, I fail to see the relevance of your quote...
[/QUOTE]
**

That's my personal signature.

Sorry, i am afraid i don't understand - what, precisely, is not relevant? Do you want me to discuss in detail why i disagree with the majority of your sentiments in that reply?

Yes, Nadia! As I gave considerable thought to my reponse, I would appreicate a slightly more detailed elucidation! When I respond to a post, I "normally" try to adress it point by point! Show me the error of my ways!

Peace To All Who Read This...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “These are the real looters”

How so? What would have been so horrible, so disastrous in lifting all civilian aspects of the embargo?

The basic fault that runs through each of the arguments that you have presented in this thread, Mr. Pockets, is that you view the lifting of sanctions as some sort of diplomatic coup delivered at the feet of Saddam Hussein. You believe it would have allowed him to claim “another glorious victory” (your words). My question is - so what? :confused: Let the dictator claim whatever he wants to - let him claim he is God’s chosen one for all i care - i couldn’t care less what Saddam Hussein claims as a diplomatic coup. Why are we so obsessed with one petty dictator’s claims - is it not more significant, surely, that 5000 civilians are dying each month as a result of this embargo ?

The basic fault that runs through your arguments, as i perceive it, is that you are more worried about what Saddam Hussein may or may not gain from lifting the embargo. Indirectly, this stance advocates that it is alright to kill 5000 civilians each month - just so that we have the mental comfort of knowing that we have not given Saddam Hussein an opportunity to brag about a “victory”.

Your stance i am afraid is flawed on diverse grounds. By lifting the civilian aspects of the embargo, Hussein would not have had any realistic claims to “victory” or morality. Indeed, it would have proven - in the eyes of millions of South Americans, Europeans, Africans, Australians, and Asians that the US government can rise up to a par that is greater than that occupied by dictators. But by refusing to lift the embargo (for whatever reason), that makes the American administration no better than those who use civilians as pawns in their political chessgames.

**
This is absolutely inaccurate, and i challenge you to provide me one neutral source that will assert this claim of yours. On the other hand, i have posted sources from the United Nations themselves that stated that the embargo was responsible for causing much of the suffering that the people of Iraq have experienced. The above claim is a myth most happily disseminated by the US administration - backed by no accurate evidence, i am sorry to state.

We are all aware of what occurred when the Versailles Treaty’s punishing terms were imposed upon Germany, subsequent to the first world war. The terms of the Treaty were designed in such a way that inevitably they caused humiliation amongst the people of Germany - caused the country massive financial losses. That is also a historical parallel worthy of our attention when we consider the future consequences of the present embargo against Iraq.

How so? i am not the one who is turning a “blind eye” to the deaths of over a million civilians. One and a half million. Just think about that. That’s the number of Iraqis that have died as a result of the sanctions. Who is turning a blind eye to what?