Sauron

Indeed. What was the point in handing out the deck of "Most Wanted" playing cards, if they weren't intended to apprehend these guys?

Cicero, you may not have received such training. However, given the nature of the planning that was done for taking and occupying Iraq, US forces *were* instructed in police-type tactics since they would have been dealing with a mixture of people: angry civilians, looters, mobsters, leftover military conscripts, etc.

Dr Rick

In the case of the bros, they were first surrounded and ordered to surrender by bullhorn, but didn't even have the decency to answer. Soldiers entered the building and were fired upon: four US soldiers were shot, and the unit was forced to retreat. US forces opened-up with rocket, grenade launcher, and machine-gun fire, then attempted again to enter the building, only to be met once more with a volley of automatic weapons fire that forced them to withdraw once more. Then the TOW missles that caused most of the destruction and probably killed two or three of the occupants were fired into the home. Soldiers entered the building a third time and were again greeted by weapons fire which was returned, killing the remaining one or two men.

These guys just weren't in the mood to cooperate with and surrender to US forces, I guess. It's easy in the comfort of our homes and offices to armchair critique a military unit under fire that had already taken casualties , but let's face it; these monsters knew that a terrible fate awaited them if they were captured, and an armed, barricaded person that doesn't want to be taken alive can usually avoid being taken alive.

Here's one scenario:

US commander: "Are you guys hiding in there the bad boys we've been looking for?"

Bad Boys: "Yes sir, that would be us"

US commander: "Well, dammit, you've just shot four of my men; would you please not do that ever again.

Bad Boys: "Oh, alright..."

US Commander: "Right. Now, look; we've got a real situation, here: we're not really trained to take unwilling prisoners alive, especially ones that know they'll get interrogated under unpleasant circumstances before they are put on trial and given a death sentence, so we're gonna have to get some help. Would you just stay put and behave yourselves until we get our act together."

Bad Boys: "Okay."

US Commander: "I'm real serious, here; you haven't made any tunnels or underground bunkers like in some of the other safe places you have, right?"

Bad Boys: "No, sir"

US commander: " And all you have is those AKs, right; no rocket launchers or grenades or something you might not have had time to get to when we surprised you here and wouldn't try to get if we gave you the time?

Bad Boys: "No, sir"

US Commander: "And none of your supporters are in route right now to come over and shoot us up, right?"

Bad Boys: "No way, sir"

US Commander: "Alright, then, just don't try anything funny."

Autonemesis

How many died so we could kill them? Was that worth it?

What if the liberated Iraqis wanted to try the Husseins in open court for war crimes (many did)? What if they needed to do that for their own sense of self-determination, not to mention closure on a terrible period of their history? Who knows what other benefits the Iraqis could have derived from seeing the rule of law upheld at last? All that has been denied them. It seems everything has been denied them: justice, self-rule, closure - all of it taken by an occupying force.

But since Hussein was a creature of US foreign policy, one might argue that this invasion is merely the latest act in a 20+ year colonial occupation-by-proxy. We just killed two of our proxies gone rogue, so we can step in and occupy the country personally.

When are those Iraqi elections scheduled?

theyeti

Good one Rick...

Though it would have been nice to have them alive, I don't fault the US commander for killing the bastards outright. However, I don't think that their deaths are very relevant to stabilizing the situation in Iraq. The Iraqis aren't going to start loving us, nor will the attacks aganst US forces cease. We lost at least 3 today and 2 yesterday, and we'll likely lose some tomorrow. The attacks are going to continue unabated (or possibly at a greater pace) and the Iraqi citizenry will continue to be uncooperative for as long as we're there.

Which is why I get irritated when I see war hawks crow about it, like Cal Thomas' article today titled something like, "death of Hussein sons trumps President's critics." Except he never explained why their deaths made such criticisms any less valid. I don't recall the continued existence of Uday and Qusay being at the top of anyone's list about how the administration had fucked-up.

theyeti

HaysooChreesto!

Is it Monday morning? It must be, because there sure are a lot of armchair quarterbacks in this thread.
I agree with the poster above who said that it's simply not worth getting one of our guys killed to take those two bastards alive.

Too bad a prolonged standoff didn't take place though. Then we could hear from all the second guessers about how incompetent the US Army is and how stupid their plan was. Better yet, we could hear from the perpetually squeamish that we need to remember they're human beings too and that their rights to legal negotiations under international law needs to be respected.
We could have watched as crowds gathered and speculation skyrocketed. The word wide news media would be in an uproar. In only a few days Barnum & Bailey could have shown up with their tents, animals, acrobats, and clowns and their spectacle would pale in comparison.

Then if Larry and Curly didn't commit suicide before being apprehended by the ham handed and obviously incompetent US Army we could gasp in horror as they were hauled off to that symbol of American bloodthirst and oppression called Guantanamo Bay. The poor boys would have no rights. The leftists would squeal in horror while speculating over the myriad abuses the brothers Husseins were enduring under evil American incarceration. It'd be great! Amnesty International could come to their aid while in the meantime they become symbols of American oppression to the always honest and forthright Arab media.

Yeah, it really is too bad they weren't taken alive.

BDS

Why does the U.S. bother to spend billions of dollars going to war? We should just start putting prices on the heads of ALL those we dislike:

Kim Jong: $50 million
Fidel Castro: $35 million
Charles Taylor: $15 million
etc.

Sure, it's expensive, but think how much sending in the troops would cost?

Also, I'm glad that according to reports we also killed Uday's (or was it Qasai's?) 14 year old son. You know these Middle Eastern types. The next generation is always looking for revenge. Good thing we nipped it in the bud.

Bruce -- not too proud of being an American, right now. No doubt the Hussein brother's were evil people, but the gloating over their assasinations is not attractive.

HaysooChreesto!

You tell me, does getting shot in the head with an AK-47 do any less damge when it's a teenager doing the firing?
Or is it more reasonable to assume that a man who isn't a fucked up demento would send his innocent son out with a white flag to surrender himself before the boy gets killed?

I'm glad they're dead and so are a lot of the people who's lives they ruined.

Arken

You don't consider four hours to kill four people in a house using 200 troops a long standoff? Because I sure do... and I am not second-guessing that if it took that long and the end result was just killing them, it was a stupid plan because that could have been accomplished with one bomber in about five minutes.

Leviathan

I'd say that's a good reason for why they weren't taken alive: this is a war and they resisted.

eldar1011

Sure, but doesn't the promise of intelligence gained through interrogation make a better reason for taking them alive?