Replies

Nonsense. If Saddam hadn't been taken out, the world would have sunk deeper into fear these last 8 years, convinced that he was developing WMD

Reality was, he wasn't, and only a few who had access to privileged intelligence, were confident he was, whilst Iran, N.Korea, Russia, and every Country with a fundamentalist Islamic subculture was either developing them, or planning to use their existing ones against the West, Blair and Bush were intent on removing, ironically, the only leader in the middle East who counterbalanced the effects of global jihadis.

In the meantime the real threat was developing their stratagem.

Question for you, would you, if you were a pragmatic leader, see Russia, Iran, N.Korea or Iraq as the most dangerous rogue state? And, you can answer that, with your opinion of 5 years ago if you wish.
I think Iraq was the least dangerous of the 4.
I think anyone who answes that truthfully would never put Iraq higher than 3rd.

I really don't think the WOT has been a success, sure there has been some leaders taken out in the process, but for every one that has, five have taken their place.
I think Iraq has had the effect of stirring the resolve of all the middle East jihadis, look what happened all over Europe after, and what is ongoing and growing.
Maybe the Islamic fundamentalists would have reacted as such without Iraq, but nonetheless, the war on Iraq has given the fundamentalists a new mantra to bind to.
We Europeans have this very issue stuffed down our throats by politicians and Islamic jihadis that live beside us in our Cities.

He may not talk as well as you would like, but he's been incredibly effective in the WOT.

I think that reads better as:

He may not talk as well as you would like, but he's been incredibly determined in the WOT.

I really like Bush, I don't think he's achieved as much as he could have, given the scale of the issues he's had to deal with.
I bet if he did it all again, he'd do it differently, now the political climate has changed so dramatically, I'd like to think he'd be more true to himself.

Nonsense. If Saddam hadn't been taken out, the world would have sunk deeper into fear these last 8 years, convinced that he was developing WMD

Reality was, he wasn't, and only a few who had access to privileged intelligence, were confident he was, whilst Iran, N.Korea, Russia, and every Country with a fundamentalist Islamic subculture was either developing them, or planning to use their existing ones against the West, Blair and Bush were intent on removing, ironically, the only leader in the middle East who counterbalanced the effects of global jihadis.

Reality was, Saddam had WMD desires and programs in the pipeline and a $10 billion corrupt slush fund due to oil-for-food kickbacks.

Perception has a way of feeding reality, and the perception that a WMD guy like Saddam could get away with pursuing WMDs without any consequences (even if his WMD program was weaker than the world thought) would have fueled a WMD arms race among rogue nations, an arms race that was ongoing in 2003 (Libya, Iran, RPNK, Syria, etc.) We would be defense against an enemy that we were unprepared to deal with on the levels necessary to stop them. The word 'impunity' on their side and 'paper tiger' on our side comes to mind.

Blair and Bush were intent on removing, ironically, the only leader in the middle East who counterbalanced the effects of global jihadis. - That has to be one of the most fatuous misdirections ever told against the Iraq war. Saddam supported terrorists. He counterbalanced nothing except democracy, human rights and sanity in the middle east.

Reality was, he wasn't, and only a few who had access to privileged intelligence, were confident he was

I wouldn't presume to say only a few. There were certainly enough to cause consternation, and with Judith Miller and her "inside info" and constant harping on the issue the fear which would have continued unabated to today would have paralyzed geopolitical progress for the US as well as for other democratically-minded countries. In addition, other rogue nations would have been emboldened to reject inspections just as Saddam was doing.

With these factors in mind, of course Saddam was up there in contention as the most dangerous rogue state. IMO when Saddam kicked out the inspectors he earned his doom. And with that event on top of the shooting in the no-fly and the abuses of the oil-for-food there was plenty of reason for invasion, which IMO has reduced the number of terrorists and terror-minded states world-wide.