Interrogation of Saddam Hussein

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Here is an interesting article about the interrogation of Saddam Hussein by FBI agent Piro.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/14/opinions/saddam-hussein-iraq-war-interrogations-george-piro-bergen/index.html


************

Two decades ago, on March 19, 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the US invasion of Iraq. Bush and senior administration officials had repeatedly told Americans that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction and that he was in league with al Qaeda.

These claims resulted in most Americans believing that Saddam was involved in the September 11, 2001, attacks. A year after 9/11, two-thirds of Americans said that the Iraqi leader had helped the terrorists, according to Pew Research Center polling, even though there was not a shred of convincing evidence for this. Nor did he have the WMD alleged by US officials.

The CIA first questioned Saddam. And then over a period of seven months, Piro talked to him for many hours a day, with no one else allowed in the interrogation room. He discovered from the Iraqi dictator that no WMD existed and that Saddam only had contempt for Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda.

The dictator’s discussions with Piro confirmed that the Iraq War was America’s original sin during the dawn of the 21st century — a war fought under false assumptions, a conflict that killed thousands of American troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

The war also damaged America’s standing in the world and the credibility of the US government among its citizens. Even the official US Army history of Iraq concluded that the real winner of the war in Iraq wasn’t America. It was … Iran.

************

The war was Bush's personal war to avenge the insult to his father....

Cheers.

Sriram

[Nearly Sane]

Did it really damage the US's standing in the world much?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Being involved in Iraq and Afghanistan was fighting a war on two fronts something I understand shouldn't be done in warfare.

I think you are right about the dynastic dimension and who collected the spoils.

[Nearly Sane]

Being involved in Iraq and Afghanistan was fighting a war on two fronts something I understand shouldn't be done in warfare.

I think you are right about the dynastic dimension and who collected the spoils

Why do you think the UK joined in then?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Why do you think the UK joined in then?

The special relationship re established by Blair, Britain in it's role as Global policeman.

[Sebastian Toe]

The special relationship re established by Blair, Britain in it's role as Global policeman.

Maybe God told them to do it in one of their joint prayer session?
Them both being committed Christians and all that entails.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Maybe God told them to do it in one of their joint prayer session?
Them both being committed Christians and all that entails.

Yes, and maybe the soviet politburo decided to have a treaty with Hitler during one of Stalin's atheist jollyups.

[Sebastian Toe]

Yes, and maybe the soviet politburo decided to have a treaty with Hitler during one of Stalin's atheist jollyups.

Stalin and Hitler were involved in Iraq conflict?
I thought they were dead.

[Udayana]

This interesting but about 20 years late.

I think it was obvious at the time that Hussein did not have any WMD and was posturing. Also that Bush/Blair did not care but had other aims, regime change and US/UK interests in the ME, in mind.

Also, for some reason, they thought they had already "won" in Afghanistan.
 

[Nearly Sane]

A take on the UK involvement


https://archive.vn/gkRTe

[Sriram]

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/17/opinions/saddam-hussein-toppling-iraq-annivesary-bergen/index.html

***********

Was toppling Saddam Hussein worth it? The answer isn’t straightforward.

after Saddam was toppled by the US, the incompetent American occupation of Iraq contributed to a civil war that tore the country apart, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. More than 4,500 US soldiers also died. The war also gave al Qaeda a new lease of life. The group known as al Qaeda in Iraq later morphed into ISIS, which seized vast amounts of Iraqi territory in 2014 and instituted a reign of terror.

The Iraq War also set a precedent for unprovoked wars that we see playing out in Ukraine today, which the Russians are already using to good effect. At a conference in India earlier this month, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called out what he termed a US “double standard” saying: “[You] believe that the United States has the right to declare a threat to its national interest, any place on earth, like they did… in Iraq?”

This message may not resonate much in the West, but it does in the Global South where the US-Iraq War and the Russian war in Ukraine are seen by many as wars of choice rather than of necessity.

************

[Nearly Sane]

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/17/opinions/saddam-hussein-toppling-iraq-annivesary-bergen/index.html

***********

Was toppling Saddam Hussein worth it? The answer isn’t straightforward.

after Saddam was toppled by the US, the incompetent American occupation of Iraq contributed to a civil war that tore the country apart, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. More than 4,500 US soldiers also died. The war also gave al Qaeda a new lease of life. The group known as al Qaeda in Iraq later morphed into ISIS, which seized vast amounts of Iraqi territory in 2014 and instituted a reign of terror.

The Iraq War also set a precedent for unprovoked wars that we see playing out in Ukraine today, which the Russians are already using to good effect. At a conference in India earlier this month, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called out what he termed a US “double standard” saying: “[You] believe that the United States has the right to declare a threat to its national interest, any place on earth, like they did… in Iraq?”

This message may not resonate much in the West, but it does in the Global South where the US-Iraq War and the Russian war in Ukraine are seen by many as wars of choice rather than of necessity.

************

I would suspect very few people would regard the question of whether the removal.of Hussein and his regime was worth it is a straightforward one.

The idea that the 2nd Iraq War set a new precedent in wars seems laughably ahistorical.

The wifespread opposition in the 'West' at the time belies the last paragraph.

[Nearly Sane]

Armando Iannucci's 20th anniversary piece

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/18/thick-of-it-iraq-war-anger-truth-tony-blair-power