I have now finished compiling a cross-reference chart comparing the rankings on the Central Command list of 55 wanted Iraqis and the deck of cards listing 52 of the same. It is at the end of the Ba'ath Poker file, but can also be reached by the link here.
There are many interesting differences, but the biggest is the ranking of the fifteen local leaders of the Ba'ath Party. Each of these is BP chairman for a different governate and commander of the Ba'ath party militia there. All are all ranked much higher on the list of 55. There they are in the middle of that list, numbers 22 to 36, with the chairman of the Baghdad governate naturally coming first. In the deck of cards, they are all at the bottom, with the Baghdad chairman a mere 5 of Diamonds, while the others are three of the 4s, all eight of the 3s and 2s, and three who didn't even make the cut (sorry about the pun) for the deck of cards.
Next question: Were the two lists compiled at different times? If so, does the unfolding of the war explain the ups and downs in various rankings? As it became clear that most troops were not going to fight, their commanders might well have seemed less important, while political leaders might well have moved up. Or was one or both of the lists just thrown together without a lot of thought?Posted by Dr. Weevil at April 28, 2003 12:25 PM