Blair takes the stand..

[minestrone]

The most you are going to get out of him is "maybe we got a few things wrong but I stand by the war based upon the intelligence given to us at the time".

Covers all the bases really.

[lilelvis2000]

Alistar Campbell and his other cronies have cover his ass pretty well already. He's got nothing to worry about. When he's done he can safetly fly off to Dubai and broker some more deals for JP Morgan - or whatever bank he works for now. The millions look good on him, no?

[scooterscot]

I watched 10 minutes and YAWN -

This enquiry is as important as watching paint dry and signifies nothing, a play to the masses to portray a sense of empathy. It's not washing off on me.

[Diver]

The most you are going to get out of him is "maybe we got a few things wrong but I stand by the war based upon the intelligence given to us at the time".

Covers all the bases really.

The fact that for three years the world screamed at Sadam's use of weapons of mass destruction on his own people (Different Ethnic tribes) was televised worldwide. showing villages full of dead men women and children. Women laying dead in the streets clutching dead babies after being gassed by Sadam's troops. Iran complaining to the UN about Sadam using poison gas on Iranian troops and televising pictures. Sadam wiping out Kurdish villages with poison gas and nerve toxins.

Of course, this is no evidence of Iraq's possession of these weapons is it?

Oh yes! They hanged Sadam's henchman last week for gassing 50,000 villagers. isn't gas, a weapon of mass destruction?

Of course, as they couldn't find where they'd hidden the weapons in the thousands of square miles of desert., the attack on Iraq must have been wrong

[suityou01]

I'm more worried about what they'll do so it isn't the main thing on the evening news.

Threaded, you have gone up in my estimation. Delightful piece of cynicism. Well done.

I read recently on one of my tin foil hat sites that one theory is the Haiti earthquate was man made using a seismic weapon / tectonic weapon.

[lilelvis2000]

The fact that for three years the world screamed at Sadam's use of weapons of mass destruction on his own people (Different Ethnic tribes) was televised worldwide. showing villages full of dead men women and children. Women laying dead in the streets clutching dead babies after being gassed by Sadam's troops. Iran complaining to the UN about Sadam using poison gas on Iranian troops and televising pictures. Sadam wiping out Kurdish villages with poison gas and nerve toxins.

Of course, this is no evidence of Iraq's possession of these weapons is it?

Oh yes! They hanged Sadam's henchman last week for gassing 50,000 villagers. isn't gas, a weapon of mass destruction?

Of course, as they couldn't find where they'd hidden the weapons in the thousands of square miles of desert., the attack on Iraq must have been wrong

Wasn't Iraq buddy buddy with the USA at that time? They - NATO - invaded kosovo to prevent genocide, strange how they didn't invade Iraq to prevent further genocide.

[sal626]

The fact that for three years the world screamed at Sadam's use of weapons of mass destruction on his own people (Different Ethnic tribes) was televised worldwide. showing villages full of dead men women and children. Women laying dead in the streets clutching dead babies after being gassed by Sadam's troops. Iran complaining to the UN about Sadam using poison gas on Iranian troops and televising pictures. Sadam wiping out Kurdish villages with poison gas and nerve toxins.

Of course, this is no evidence of Iraq's possession of these weapons is it?

Oh yes! They hanged Sadam's henchman last week for gassing 50,000 villagers. isn't gas, a weapon of mass destruction?

Of course, as they couldn't find where they'd hidden the weapons in the thousands of square miles of desert., the attack on Iraq must have been wrong

A few points

1) USA was happy to sell Saddam chemicals to gas his own people. Rumsfeld visited him after he had gassed his own people and was happy to extend further lines of credit.
2) Since 1990, there has been the most extensive inspection regime EVER conducted. This accounted for all of the weapons – many chemical weapons had already by passed the “use by” date.
3) As for hiding the weapons, I remember Powell showing powerpoints to the UN telling everyone the US knew EXACTLY where the weapons were hidden/being moved to.

[VectraMan]

3) As for hiding the weapons, I remember Powell showing powerpoints to the UN telling everyone the US knew EXACTLY where the weapons were hidden/being moved to.

I remember that well. I wasn't very convinced at the time, and obviously I was right not to be convinced.

Blair seems to be taking the line that it was a judgement call that he had to make based on the likely risks, not that the evidence was clear. Which is fair enough, but that doesn't stop the fact that it was probably illegal under international law, that he didn't have the right to be making that call without international support, and that he was arrogant in believing he must be right when France, Germany, Russia etc. were all of a different view.

[Doggy Styles]

1. Saddam's attrocities against the Kurds and the swamp people were mostly pre-1991. Since then he had been handcuffed by the weapons inspectors and no-fly zones.
   
2. Long before the 2003 invasion, the inspectors were saying they could find no evidence that he had any WMDs left.
   
3. Saddam was an ally against fundamentalists like Al Quaeda and Iran, who are both far greater threats to the UK and the west than he ever was.

Given this, and Blair knew it all at the time, invading Iraq and deposing Saddam shows a terrible lack of judgement.

I believe Blair's motivation was his "moment in history", like Thatcher got with the Falklands and Churchill got with WW2. What seems to have passed him by is that they didn't pick their fights.

He should be rightly reviled for his part in Iraq. It's all very well claiming he did what he believed was right, but so did many of history's worst despots (like Saddam himself). At best Blair is a foolish man.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

1. Saddam's attrocities against the Kurds and the swamp people were mostly pre-1991. Since then he had been handcuffed by the weapons inspectors and no-fly zones.
2. Long before the 2003 invasion, the inspectors were saying they could find no evidence that he had any WMDs left.
3. Saddam was an ally against fundamentalists like Al Quaeda and Iran, who are both far greater threats to the UK and the west than he ever was.

Given this, and Blair knew it all at the time, invading Iraq and deposing Saddam shows a terrible lack of judgement.

I believe Blair's motivation was his "moment in history", like Thatcher got with the Falklands and Churchill got with WW2. What seems to have passed him by is that they didn't pick their fights.

He should be rightly reviled for his part in Iraq. It's all very well claiming he did what he believed was right, but so did many of history's worst despots (like Saddam himself). At best Blair is a foolish man.

Blair is the man as far as I am concerned.

Every Iraqi I have spoken to (there are plenty around where I live) said keeping saddam would have meant loads more mass graves and they are so thankful for getting rid of him.

Also Saddam regularly tortured and killed people in his country be they shia, sunni, kurd or christian. The guy didn't really care so long as you didn't agree with him 100% then out comes your tongue, liver and off goes your head.

As far Saddam being an ally of Al Qaida/Iran: {EDITED OUT}
Iran = Media Hype - no suicide bombers or terrorists are iranian. All nonsense.

Invading Iraq got rid of the worst human on earth. Well done blair