A Small Victory

Very astute. You are so right!

I have read that the Bush admin has had him but were holdiing for just the right moment. Sure. Riiiiiiiiight. :::eyeroll:::

...because you know they're holding off on the news they've got Osama bin Laden until next October....

i mean, huh? if they wanted to get everybody's attention and get perfect timing, this would have been announced in the middle of a bowl game or something, not on a snowy Sunday morning when people are trying to sleep off holiday party hangovers.

my lord. the only worse time i can think of for a major news event would be august.

The hole they found Saddam in was up Michael Moore's ass. That is why it took so long.

This is not Saddam... This is not even a Saddam double...Its Walter Matthau's stunt double from Pirates.

LeftyWorld's sourpuss reaction is as predictable as the simian glee of Neocons. The "ability" to guess what's being said in the other camp doesn't make anybody astute. it just exposes those who think it's astute as morons.

Shows what you know. I am not a "neocon," yet I am awash in simian glee.

You are absolutely right. I could only stand to wade thru the muck at DU for about 15 minutes, but you have them all down.

You're more of a paleo-con, aren't you McGehee? :)

the capture of this guy will not make us more secure because he was not responsible for 9/11. Bush and the other evil assholes will continue to lie about this and the American sheeple will continue to believe the lies and we will have 4 more years (or more) of these thieves and liars!! This is what upsets me the most about this. I care nothing one way or another for Hussein but Bush will use this to win reelection. The timing is suspicious though- just when his approval ratings seemed to be in freefall. Hmmmm. Gotta wonder if this was a setup.

Really, Michele, I'm honored again that you've once again decided that Metafilter, being of course the bastion of leftist thought, has "pissed on the parade" by talking about it.

I'm sure once I get through all the posts from left-leaning posters, myself included, who mentioned how good this news is, that I'll get to the part where it becomes a partisan snipe-fest- usually at the point when the pro-war people start announcing pre-emptively that anti-war bloggers aren't somehow allowed to objectively address this just as everyone did following 9/11, or for that matter any significant news of any day.

Saddam was captured. This is fantastic news. The fact that I'm not celebrating it as if we've beaten the final boss of a video game doesn't mean I'm "pissing on the parade" except in the eyes of those who are upset that I'm not immediately conceding my enrollment in the Democratic Party for some reason.

Please, all on the pro-war side who apparently feel as though every incorrect assumption they've made in the last eight months is now vindicated, forgive my insolence in sharing my happiness with you all with only 80% of my faculties instead of 100%.

I'm one of those mad lefties. For a while I was truly despondent and upset over the situation in Iraq. With today's news a huge grin has crept over my face and I'm truly elated and pleased that Hussein has been captured.

I cannot speak for others, I wasn't happy about the route and the dubious claims for War. However, once you go along a route and committment it was priority to capture that f*cker.

Now we come to an interesting juncture. How will he be debriefed? Will the information become public? And how far back do we go? Alot of his crimes occurred during an unpleasant period before the first Gulf War. I would imagine the information he releases, whether they're lies or not, will be incredibly embarrassing.

If the remit of any trial were to be limited to the post-Gulf War period, we must all examine why this is happening and if this is a just course of action.

"The fact that I'm not celebrating it as if we've beaten the final boss of a video game..."

Well, as long as we're keeping it in perspective.

You're more of a paleo-con, aren't you McGehee? :)

Hyphenate this! ;-)

"""I cannot speak for others, I wasn't happy about the route and the dubious claims for War. However, once you go along a route and committment it was priority to capture that f*cker.""""

I was in the same boat earlier in the year - not very happy with how things started out. But I firmly believe that once such an undertaking is started, it needs to be carried thru and carried out WELL. Now that we are there, we need to clean it up and not leave until the job is done. To pull out prematurely creates nearly a greater internal disaster than if we had not gone in the first place.

Therefore, although I didn't support things to begin with, I was EXTREMELY happy to hear the news this morning!

We got em' and the left had no part of it. But wait, now they will claim that it was "Clinton's Military" that captured Saddam.

We got em' and the left had no part of it. But wait, now they will claim that it was "Clinton's Military" that captured Saddam.

The "Clinton's Military" line is directly from the current Vice-President's statement that the president should thank the previous one for his military orders. Outside of Al Franken, who said it to tweak Rumsfeld, I don't see any mainstream Democrats spouting this line.

As far as "the left having no part of it," the "it" I assume being Saddam's capture, umm... what? Outside of the president being a conservative, how does "the right" take credit for this? Because they supported it more than the left did?

Politically, this is obviously a huge score for the pro-war right and conservatives, and I can't argue with that. Bush as commander-in-chief will rightly enjoy the good news. But unless you show me the videotape of the GOP senate and/or warbloggers and TV pundits participating in military planning operations I fail to see how the actual physical act of capturing Saddam Hussein merits congratulations for anyone other than the soldiers who pulled it off. Bit early for the Monday-morning quarterbacking, I'd say.

Haha, great insight into the Republican/conservative mind as there are absolutely NO liberals claiming those conspiracies.

When I say "I wasn't very happy about the route", well, I should clarify. Preemptive action was not justifiable or legal in any way shape or form. If the reasons were made more explicit I would at least admire the candor.

At this point in time, staying in Iraq is a viable option but certainly not the best option. It wouldn't take much effort to allow a American troop withdrawal and the allowance of a stable transition under the auspices of an International body. It would legitimize the action but at this late stage I don't care about that. And, with Saddam capture it makes it more likely.

I don't think American troop deployment in the region will stabilize and allow a smooth transition, it's a bit like tethering a fox to the chicken coop and wondering why the chickens are so agitated -- yes, the fox could be anything, even Saddam, but in this case he's neutered.

Few, even on Metafilter are saying that this isn't good news. (For that matter, Howard Dean's also saying that it is good news). Predicting the knee-jerk extreme left and predicting the knee-jerk extreme right are both easy things to do and largely irrelevant.

On the other hand this does not retroactively justify the conquest and occupation of Iraq. My view (and that of many moderate lefties) is that the reasons for going to war were almost certainly lies and weak at best, but once the occupation has started we have a duty to do things properly and that this is a step forward in such.

Also triumphs like that are probably the best time to talk about the reasons for war and whether Bush should be impeached for lying to the American people to bring them to war (as opposed to lying to them because he couldn't keep it in his pants) as they are when the greatest number of people are thinking about it and when the defence is likely to be strongest.

Nevertheless, that this is good news seems to be the consensus even of the anti-war left, and both the left and the right have their loonies at whom it is very easy to take pot shots, thus accomplishing very little other than amusing the already converted and irritating the moderates on the other side by misrepresenting their position.

You must be reading a very different set of reactions from the anti-war left. The one I'm reading is essentially 'okay, you got Saddam, but YOU HAVE ACCOMPLISHED NOTHING! IT IS A PROPAGANDA VICTORY ONLY FOR BUSH AND HIS LEGION OF BLEATING SHEEPLE!' There's zero rational discussion. And nobody seems to have grasped that we now have the only man in the entire world who can give us a final and definite answer on the WMD question. Especially if it means the difference between his death by firing squad and the rest of his life in a prison cell.

What I'm reading seems to be a few extremists saying that nothing has happened over and over again and the majority even of the anti-war group saying that this is a success, saying it once and not bothering to stay for the debate on the grounds that there is no point engaging with the real extremes on either side. By proportion of posts or messages it seems to be about equal, by proportion of people it seems to be acknowledged as a good thing.