Wordyard

Hand-forged posts since 2002

Scott Rosenberg

  • About
  • Greatest hits

Archives

Wordyard / Politics / Saddam trial Orwell watch

Saddam trial Orwell watch

November 5, 2006 by Scott Rosenberg 9 Comments

We understand that, ever since the timing of the initial invasion — whose urgency was partly dictated by the need to “finish the job” well in advance of the 2004 election cycle — the Bush administration has done everything it can to orchestrate events in Iraq for maximum electoral impact.

So the fact that Saddam Hussein’s verdict has emerged immediately preceding U.S. elections can be safely ascribed to Bush’s desperate need to show some results from the Iraq fiasco.

This morning, White House spokesman Tony Snow said that suggestions that the U.S. “schemed” with the Iraqi court to time the verdict were “preposterous.” “The judiciary is operating independently,” he said. “It’s important to give [Iraqis] credit for running their own government.”

No, I don’t think the White House needed any “scheming.” The Iraqi court knows exactly what its “mission” is without being explicitly ordered. Coordination doesn’t require command.

The simple fact remains: this verdict represents a last-minute spasm of the GOP’s desperate hang-on-to-power campaign. And the White House is doing its Orwellian part in loudly denying the fact and protesting the Iraqis’ independence.

Sadly for them, the election’s outcome won’t really make a difference to the bloodshed in Iraq, the dynamics of which long ago spun out of American control. And once U.S. forces have abandoned the wreckage of the occupation, how long do you think Saddam’s judges have left to live?

UPDATE: It seems the court didn’t actually even finish preparing the full verdict. But there was some strange compulsion to report the verdict in abbreviated form on Sunday. See Josh Marshall’s post. This pretty much shreds the “Iraqis are independent, they work on their own timetable” lie.
[tags]saddam hussein, tony snow[/tags]

Post Revisions:

There are no revisions for this post.

Filed Under: Politics

Comments

  1. Anthony Bullock

    November 5, 2006 at 12:53 pm

    When informed about the 9/11 attacks, Saddam said “A great day”. This was his only crime.

  2. libhomo

    November 5, 2006 at 12:55 pm

    Another interesting aspect of this show-trial is that Saddam’s worst crimes, involving chemical and biological weapons provided to him by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the rest of the Reagan Administration were not in the charges against the former dictator.

  3. James Robertson

    November 5, 2006 at 1:15 pm

    Wearing your tinfoil hat to keep the Rovian mind control rays out?

    This trial has seen a series of delays and grandstanding for eons now. Had you paid even the least bit of attention to any of that, you might come to non-tinfoil based conclusions.

    Here’s a tip: It’s not all about Bush, the elections, and Republicans. Take a deep breath, and get a life.

  4. Scott Rosenberg

    November 5, 2006 at 3:36 pm

    Sure, the trial has had all sorts of problems. (The Bush administration could actually have avoided many of them by letting Saddam be tried at an international court. But we didn’t believe in multilateralism.)

    In any case, at a certain point it became clear that a verdict was likely some time this fall. Once that happened, the court could not fail to be aware of the U.S. electoral calendar — since the court would not even exist without the intervention and continued presence of US troops. It is hardly tin-foil-based to observe the precision with which the verdict was timed for maximum impact in the U.S.

  5. jd

    November 5, 2006 at 8:11 pm

    Sad that the punishment metted out is right out of the Saddam playbook.

  6. Rafe

    November 6, 2006 at 7:16 am

    Isn’t it odd that the same people who repeatedly assert that the increasing violence in Iraq this fall is a result of “terrorists” trying to game the US midterm election completely dismiss the idea that the verdict was timed to help out Republicans on Tuesday? I think that the probability of the latter being true is much higher than the probability of the former being true.

Trackbacks

  1. Scripting News for 11/5/2006 « Scripting News Annex says:
    November 5, 2006 at 10:55 am

    […] Scott Rosenberg: “The fact that Saddam Hussein’s verdict has emerged immediately preceding U.S. elections can be safely ascribed to Bush’s desperate need to show some results from the Iraq fiasco.”  […]

  2. “Orwell watch” at SynapseChronicles says:
    November 6, 2006 at 2:32 am

    […] Scott Rosenberg has an interesting take on the Saddam Hussein trial verdict: Saddam trial Orwell watch. […]

  3. Memex 1.1 » Blog Archive » Saddam’s trial says:
    November 6, 2006 at 4:34 am

    […] From Scott Rosenberg’s Wordyard… I don’t think the White House needed any “scheming.” The Iraqi court knows exactly what its “mission” is without being explicitly ordered. Coordination doesn’t require command. […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *