3 ms·

But repainting Saddam as a misunderstood author who had nothing but a desire to preserve well written Arabic is revisionist and wrong. That's a reductive and c

• iambateman 3y ago
  Perhaps, but not the article. The article uses words like “meticulous” and “tactful” to describe the dictator. He was “slowing down.” He “didn’t think the US was serious.” I imagine that the book brings out nuance that the article skips, but I reread the article and I stand by my characterization of it. It sounds like you have read the book, so would you be up for explaining where I’m being reductive? I have personal connections to many Iraqi’s, and having a full understanding of what led to that war is genuinely important to me.
  • pvg 3y ago
    That's not the tone and meaning of the article either, you're reacting to individual words. Simply trying to describe his mental state, possible motivations, etc does not somehow imply apologia. I'm not sure how discussing the book (I did just finish it and recommend it, you're right!) is going to help much, though, if just a basic description of some of its points seem so imbued with value judgement to you - it just isn't there, really.