Originally posted by Toad
It would certainly make the intel gathering and evaluating process suspect at the very least. But we really don't know what evidence was presented do we?
Thought he made his case before the UN and congressional IC with US Intell. He managed to persuade Britain and several other contries...
I recall Blair coming out and saying that he had seen the US evidence and was convinced.
Ok... it sort of makes one wonder... how the Brits could also be convinced.
Ok say US Intell was totally and utterly wrong. Wow! That's quite an "Oopsie!"
Perhaps kind like the Maine and Cuba.... was it a bomb... or did the boiler just blow?
WWI - and the assaisination in Serbia sparking conflict through out Europe.
Odd how if one were to step out of the situation and emotion of the time, one might see a completely different picture - miscalculations.
For example... do you truely believe Iran, Lybya, and North Korea's current reversal in rhetoric and willingness to co-operate and play well in the national community was forseen and planned by the Bush administration or was it just serendipidy... and now they are seizing upon the opportunity to credit for it.
If you believe the former, then the Bush administrations are sheer political geniuses and advanced thinkers.
If you believe the latter, then they are bumbling fools who got lucky.
What's the pattern? What's their track record in regards to predictions which came true, and predictions which were false?
If the majority of them are true then they are adept at adjusting world politics - influencing other nations.
If the majority of them are false then they are idiots playing a dangerous game with people lives.
I guess tha'st why their prediction that Iraq had WMD becomes important. Because there is a third answer... there were never any WMD and they knew it... and they saw the threat in these other countries (and more)... and this was their ploy to solve them.
What's the evidence?
Everyone admits North Korea was working on WMD, nuclear weapons, and they could do it, and they were close - this wasn't bravado speaking, Saddam and his "scud" missile teachnology - oh wow what a threat... acturate to what plus or minus 300 miles (ok I do exagerate - to make a point at the "real" differences in threats.
North Korea was a greater threat to the sability of Asia than Saddam was a threat to the middle east. His army and Air Force was a joke.
North Korea has the capability to rain death upon millions of people with in minutes. Millions of people. Everyone knows this.
What's the political fall out if America allowed that situation to escalate - and it happened?
there's more...
The question is what country could be use as an example... to convery to the rest of the world this kind of behavior was not tolerable.. and the consequences would be unacceptable?
Lybya? Haven't heard peep with them for a decade... and they were co-operating with the Pam 103 trials.
Iran? It's a toss up.
Compared to Iraq - perfect. A thorn in the side. Constant violations.... already had a military presence - ready - capable.
spins a good story?
Ok back to some metrics
Business use charts - sales, market share, customers, etc - to measure their health as a business - growing, skrinking, gaining market share...etc.
Diplomats do the same and so do "intelligence" agencies by tracking what countries say, what they do, what their capabilities are - and the personalities in power and factoring all of these variables to predict what a country wiill do.
Will NK really attack the USA/Korea/Japan if the US calls for a sanction in the UN?
What's the calculated risk?
Do they mean it?
Check the metrics.
If they always do what they say they will do - it's likely that they mean it.
If the leader is a hot head and has a history of this - it's likely that they will do it.
If they have the techonology and have tested it, - they have the capability of doing what they say.
Would the reprecussions be worth their action?
If they're situation were already dire - their action may be worth the consequences.
The US cut off North Korea's oil shipments. North Korea not have enough energy to power all of it's industry. There for some business will have no power - no power they can not produce their products - no product - no sells - no sells - no revenue, no paychecks - unemployment.... lower economoy - economic ruin.
America is choking North Korea... to death economically by denying them energy.
What do they have to loose?
Nuclear energy would releave the dependence of American oil.
I'm just writing a story here...
Pretty good fiction?
