Blair pitches for EU presidency

[DodgyAgent]

You may be right, so why did Blair come out with that bulltulip about '45 minutes' and weapons of mass destruction? He might well have convinced everyone that it was right to get rid of Saddam, although I have to wonder whether there might have been other ways to do that. But no; people weren't convinced, so instead of persuading further on a legitimate case, a pile of bulltulipe was invented, the US joined in with the most ridiculous presentation where Colin Powell told everyone that a little hut in the middle of nowhere was a chemical weapons station when the photo could just as well have been of a trucker stopping for a piss in a public bog, and we were told the danger wa imminent. Blair and Bush could have built a case based on the truth, but instead they bulltulipted their way to war.

That is all fair enough and pretty disgraceful. Had it gone through "proper channels" then saddam Hussein may well be still alive and kicking today. At times like this because we live in such an obsessively democratic environment it is easy for nothing to ever get done.
I entirely accept your point but I still think that the ends in this case justified the means - but then I have never worked for a large corporate with its cumbersome processes. To simply write Blair off as a "war criminal" because he ignored your precious "process" conveniently ignores the consequences of what would have happened had he been left alone.
I have day to day battles with HR whereby the "process" is more important than filling the job, and though I have yet to use the WMD excuse for sending unsolicited CVs, I might now make some up and drop them on members of internal resourcing - only difference being mine will be real.

[Mich the Tester]

That is all fair enough and pretty disgraceful. had it gone through "proper channels" then saddam Hussein may well be still alive and kicking today. At times like this because we live in such an obsessively democratic environment it is easy for nothing to ever get done.
I entirely accept your point but I still think that the ends justified the means but to simply write Blair off as a "war criminal" because he ignored your precious "process" conveniently ignores the consequences of what would have happened had he been left alone.

I don't think that's necessarily the case; it's quite feasible that other major players, like France and Germany could have been persuaded by the case that this man's regime was simply so putrid and would present a danger in the future that a bigger coalition could have been built, and it's quite possible that the British public AND the US public could have been persuaded by that; I was actually in favour of strikes against Saddam and Iraq, up to the point that Colin Powell gave his presentation to the UN, and it was then apparent that the evidence presented for WMDs was so meagre that I felt I was being lied to. Blair's '45 minutes' story was such obvious scaremongering it made me very suspicious too. Now OK, sometimes governments need to lie and keep things secret; I'm not that naïve, but lying through his teeth and presenting a complete lack of evidence as 'overwhelming evidence' and then sending young people to kill and get killed, no that's unforgivable.

[Robinho]

Blair is a war criminal.

It's very simple.

[Mich the Tester]

Blair is a war criminal.

It's very simple.

He is, but it's not simple.

[Robinho]

What isn't simple about it?

He lied to take us to war.

He should be tried quite frankly.

[darmstadt]

Blair is a war criminal.

It's very simple.

And his bum chum Bush.

[Mich the Tester]

And his bum chum Bush.

Bush could plead mental incapacity.

[DodgyAgent]

I don't think that's necessarily the case; it's quite feasible that other major players, like France and Germany could have been persuaded by the case that this man's regime was simply so putrid and would present a danger in the future that a bigger coalition could have been built, and it's quite possible that the British public AND the US public could have been persuaded by that; I was actually in favour of strikes against Saddam and Iraq, up to the point that Colin Powell gave his presentation to the UN, and it was then apparent that the evidence presented for WMDs was so meagre that I felt I was being lied to. Blair's '45 minutes' story was such obvious scaremongering it made me very suspicious too. Now OK, sometimes governments need to lie and keep things secret; I'm not that naïve, but lying through his teeth and presenting a complete lack of evidence as 'overwhelming evidence' and then sending young people to kill and get killed, no that's unforgivable.

Well if he had gained "permission" then he probably would have needed to get it also from Russia and China too so it is quite conceivable that Saddam would have been at large today. As for sending people to be killed then the same would have happened if he had gained permission anyway.

[DodgyAgent]

And his bum chum Bush.

I didnt see your precious German friends stepping up.

[Robinho]

If you want to do operation liberate Iraq then tell that to the electorate and get it voted on in parliament.