Kill Saddam!

U.S. journalists agree: If you can’t beat him, assassinate him.

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


The latest saber-rattling with Iraq has an odd twist: As the United States government shows restraint and revives the lost art of diplomacy, this time it’s the U.S. press that’s howling for blood — the blood of Saddam Hussein personally. The press, of course, has the distinct advantage that nobody really follows their policy suggestions anyway, so their advice doesn’t have to be diplomatic, or even legal:

The law:

Prohibition on Assassination. No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.
— Executive Order 12333, issued Dec. 4, 1981, by President Ronald Reagan, continuing the policy of his predecessors Ford and Carter. Neither Bush nor Clinton has rescinded it.

The handy (and illegal) tips from the press:

“Conventional Wisdom,” Newsweek, Nov. 17: “Take him down.” (next to a photo of Hussein and a downward-plunging arrow)

Thomas Friedman, foreign affairs columnist, New York Times, Nov. 6: “Saddam Hussein is the reason God created cruise missiles. …So if and when Saddam pushes beyond the brink, and we get that one good shot, let’s make sure it’s a head shot.”

George Stephanopolous, former Clintonite and current ABC News analyst, on ABC’S “This Week,” Nov. 9: “This is probably one of those rare cases where assassination is the more moral course…we should kill him.”

Sam Donaldson, co-host of “This Week,” Nov. 9: We should kill Saddam “under cover of law…. We can do business with his successor.”

Bill Kristol, ABC News analyst, “This Week,” Nov. 9: “It sounds good to me.”

Cokie Roberts, co-host of “This Week,” Nov. 9: “Well, now that we’ve come out for murder on this broadcast, let us move on to fast-track…”

Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, Nov. 17: “It won’t be easy to take him out. …But we need to try, because the only language Saddam has ever understood is force.”

Newsweek, Dec. 1: “Why We Should Kill Saddam.”

Thanks to Matthew Rothschild and The Progressive for the inspiration.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest