3 ms·

Did people think highly of Saddam in 2003?

quakeguy 9y ago
Some did, but not in the western hemisphere iirc.
mc32 9y ago
There was lots of skepticism but in the end because of lack of good humint a lot of weight was placed on his behavior (his continued pretense/bluffing for the purpose of not disclosing weakness to Iran), the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion. With regard to DPRK S Korea has great humint and we have multiple defectors corroborating each other (whereas Iraq there was basically one guy feeding intelligence services lies) so I would say it's not the same. In addition, the regime provides all the evidence necessary (not just boastful claims) we sample the atmosphere as well as have seismometers corroborating their claims of nuclear development. There is no question as toward their progress nor their intentions.
- _jal 9y ago
  > the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion. This is drifting rather far off-topic, but that is an exceptionally anodyne description of how that particular chain of events came to pass.
- mythrwy 9y ago
  "the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion" Mistakes can happen and be forgiven but deception is seldom forgotten. It didn't go down quite so innocently as you portray. It appears painfully obvious that there were/are many parties with economic and other interests who were behind what turned into a giant expensive catastrophe and killed hundreds of thousands. No one has even been reprimanded much less punished. A lot of them are still around trying to beat war drums for Syria. Trust was broken. The effects of that will go on for a long time and they aren't good. re. North Korea "There is no question as toward their progress nor their intentions." Fully agree. Very much unlike Iraq (or even less Iran and Syria) NK is truly dangerous and leaving them to continue their present course doesn't seem wise. Supporting almost no military adventures the US has engaged in over the last 30 years I would fully support any action necessary against NK. But hopefully it doesn't come to that. It's a shame someone has been calling wolf every few years for economic gains and now when a real wolf is at the door lots of people won't listen. Look at the comments on this thread. People don't trust. And with very good reason. But in the case of NK I think they are mistaken. If there is a place a germ or technology comes out of that kills half the globe it will be there. ISIS are a bunch of circus clowns in comparison.
  - mc32 9y ago
    There is lots of blame to go around with re Iraq. Our intelligence, Saddam himself (calling a bluff he could not possibly win, the cat-mouse game, in addition to just being a tyrant), opposition, Shiites, many western countries (but curiously Russia opposed) etc. It may not seem like it from the way I write, but I was utterly devastated when the congress approved the plans. But I take one incident at a time. I try not to color unrelated things.
- 1001101 9y ago
  I Can see how saddam's brand of pan-Arab socialist nationalism combined with Iraq's oil wealth could be irksome in some circles. Don't get me wrong, I believe that NK presents a real and present danger. A continuous stream of bellicose rhetoric combined with progress on ICBMs and a current nuclear + LEO satellite = EMP capability troubles me. I don't deny the facts there. A change of course seems perfectly reasonable, necessary, and prudent. I will celebrate liberty for the North Korean people, and Kim's return to dust. My feeling is that the least palatable options to thinking and feeling human beings are the most probable at this point (for various reasons), hence the need for the narrative. It just seems to me like a bug in our democracy that we don't get a clear accounting, representation, and participation in grave decisions like these, and I hope someday that bug gets patched.

Some did, but not in the western hemisphere iirc.

mc32 9y ago

There was lots of skepticism but in the end because of lack of good humint a lot of weight was placed on his behavior (his continued pretense/bluffing for the purpose of not disclosing weakness to Iran), the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion. With regard to DPRK S Korea has great humint and we have multiple defectors corroborating each other (whereas Iraq there was basically one guy feeding intelligence services lies) so I would say it's not the same. In addition, the regime provides all the evidence necessary (not just boastful claims) we sample the atmosphere as well as have seismometers corroborating their claims of nuclear development. There is no question as toward their progress nor their intentions.

_jal 9y ago
> the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion. This is drifting rather far off-topic, but that is an exceptionally anodyne description of how that particular chain of events came to pass.
mythrwy 9y ago
"the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion" Mistakes can happen and be forgiven but deception is seldom forgotten. It didn't go down quite so innocently as you portray. It appears painfully obvious that there were/are many parties with economic and other interests who were behind what turned into a giant expensive catastrophe and killed hundreds of thousands. No one has even been reprimanded much less punished. A lot of them are still around trying to beat war drums for Syria. Trust was broken. The effects of that will go on for a long time and they aren't good. re. North Korea "There is no question as toward their progress nor their intentions." Fully agree. Very much unlike Iraq (or even less Iran and Syria) NK is truly dangerous and leaving them to continue their present course doesn't seem wise. Supporting almost no military adventures the US has engaged in over the last 30 years I would fully support any action necessary against NK. But hopefully it doesn't come to that. It's a shame someone has been calling wolf every few years for economic gains and now when a real wolf is at the door lots of people won't listen. Look at the comments on this thread. People don't trust. And with very good reason. But in the case of NK I think they are mistaken. If there is a place a germ or technology comes out of that kills half the globe it will be there. ISIS are a bunch of circus clowns in comparison.
- mc32 9y ago
  There is lots of blame to go around with re Iraq. Our intelligence, Saddam himself (calling a bluff he could not possibly win, the cat-mouse game, in addition to just being a tyrant), opposition, Shiites, many western countries (but curiously Russia opposed) etc. It may not seem like it from the way I write, but I was utterly devastated when the congress approved the plans. But I take one incident at a time. I try not to color unrelated things.
1001101 9y ago
I Can see how saddam's brand of pan-Arab socialist nationalism combined with Iraq's oil wealth could be irksome in some circles. Don't get me wrong, I believe that NK presents a real and present danger. A continuous stream of bellicose rhetoric combined with progress on ICBMs and a current nuclear + LEO satellite = EMP capability troubles me. I don't deny the facts there. A change of course seems perfectly reasonable, necessary, and prudent. I will celebrate liberty for the North Korean people, and Kim's return to dust. My feeling is that the least palatable options to thinking and feeling human beings are the most probable at this point (for various reasons), hence the need for the narrative. It just seems to me like a bug in our democracy that we don't get a clear accounting, representation, and participation in grave decisions like these, and I hope someday that bug gets patched.