Anthony Charles Lynton Blair.

[Sorrel]

Let's just hope that the bill comes to less than the £400,000,000 that the Bloody Sunday Inquiry has cost to date, and which has still not produced a report.

I thought the plan behind the Bloody Sunday inquiry was to keep it going until everyone alive back then is so old they can't remember anyway.

 

[auschr]

Just to clarify, the quote included in your post was not mine, it was Piltdown Man.

As regards the resolutions, I believe reference to these continue to be a red herring. Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq was continuing to breach the terms of the ceasefire of the 1990 war and gave a final warning for co-operation. Some interpret it as giving licence for repercussions for failure to comply others don't. Blair states he would have preferred a second resolution but this was never going to happen because France were protecting their commercial interest in Iraq and had stated they would veto any resolution.

Also, let's not forget that it wasn't just the US and UK that thought Saddam had WMD. Chinese intelligence suggested that the WMD had been moved to Syria, presumably to avoid detection. In a report byt The Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy they state 'In contrast (to blair and bush), according to Blix, President Chirac had a healthy scepticism about intelligence. Although the French intelligence services were convinced WMD remained in Iraq.' But France still put their commercial interests first!!!

As for the arguments about there being worse regimes, none of the others had attacked their neighbours, Iraq had on two occassions, and none of the others had, to our knowledge, used WMD previously, either on their own people or on their neighbours.

If Saddam had WMD it was right to remove him and we could only act on the intelligence we had at the time. Saddam may have played a dangerous game of bluff, either to keep Iran in check or to protect his own position from internal challenges, (remembering that the Iraq Research Group found that even some of his own generals believed he had the wmd) or he may well have had the WMD removed to Syria, as China believed, in which case he still posed a massive threat to the region.

I don't doubt for one minute that hindsight has enabled Blair to possibly 're-align' some of his arguments but equally, hindsight has allowed the anti-war protaganists to justify their views on the basis that no WMD was found.

You can only act on what you know at any given time and not what you might know in a few years time.

wow. any facts in there or just made up stories trying to defend prowar nazis? no wmd were found because none existed. US media spent years trying to come up with an excuse and the best they could come up with is that they were moved. Or perhaps you believe they buried them LOL. Blame France, Russia, or whoever else for all the problems of the pro war people. France's commercial interest were pretty microscopic compared to the ones of the USA. After all, don't blame France and the rest of the intelligent world for not taking the complete bollocks Collin Powell and the rest of the Awesome Coalition of Freedom served up continually.

Some awesome facts, I loved all the drawings, must be true.

I have a ferrari, want the proof?

After all this is the same country that was willing to kill its own just to justify a reason to invade cuba

Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Tooting Gull]

There were a lot of conflicting reports about the cost of the Bloody Sunday inquiry. It certainly was reported as £400m by at least one paper, but more recently was put at nearer £180m. Like it matters - still absurd.

 

[Rookie]

So, exactly what 'war crimes' was Blair guilty of that would put him up before the Hague or do you just spout what you read in your crap red top papers or what your mates said down the pub. Do you honestly believe that orders were given to execute cold bloodly men women and children and bury them in mass graves? Or is it just the fact that you didn't agree with the decision to go to war? Perhaps Churchill should be posthumously put on trial, Maggie Thatcher for the Belgrano etc etc. Comments like the pair of you make are so dumb it is unbelievable.



Firstly, I suspect most politicians lie but could you be specific about which lies you are referring to rather than generalisations.

Well considering I was studying International law at degree level when he took the decision together with Bush in invade Iraq my opinions do not come from the papers or my mates but from official UN security council procedure and many International law text books and experts with years of experience in the field. Just because you don't agree with my view (and the view of millions of people worldwide) does not make you right and I would suggest you do some serious research on when war (or invasion of a sovereign state if you like) is legal and when it is not

 

[drew]

wow. any facts in there or just made up stories trying to defend prowar nazis? no wmd were found because none existed. US media spent years trying to come up with an excuse and the best they could come up with is that they were moved. Or perhaps you believe they buried them LOL. Blame France, Russia, or whoever else for all the problems of the pro war people. France's commercial interest were pretty microscopic compared to the ones of the USA. After all, don't blame France and the rest of the intelligent world for not taking the complete bollocks Collin Powell and the rest of the Awesome Coalition of Freedom served up continually.

Some awesome facts, I loved all the drawings, must be true.

I have a ferrari, want the proof?

After all this is the same country that was willing to kill its own just to justify a reason to invade cuba

Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Forgive me but are you a former member of the Ba'ath Party. I thought it was accepted that Iraq had had and had used WMD, both on the Kurds and on the Iranians, seems everyone was wrong because Mike knows better! The French Intelligence thought there was WMD, China thought it had been moved but Mike knows better than these two members of the Security Council. Well, perhaps Mike should run for president and the world will be a better place.

Dickhead! Don't recall you mentioning any facts in any of you posts just emotional vitriol.

 

[drew]

Well considering I was studying International law at degree level when he took the decision together with Bush in invade Iraq my opinions do not come from the papers or my mates but from official UN security council procedure and many International law text books and experts with years of experience in the field. Just because you don't agree with my view (and the view of millions of people worldwide) does not make you right and I would suggest you do some serious research on when war (or invasion of a sovereign state if you like) is legal and when it is not

Bully for you. If it was as clear cut as you make out then there would have been far fewer countries involved in the coalition. The fact is that that it is opinion by some that it was not an illegal war and the opinion of others that it was. Just because you studied international law doesn't make you right.
Jesus, there are lawyers on both sides of every court case because they all believe they know what's right.

You don't agree with my view but probably there are millions world wide that do so what. There hasn't been a global referendum as far as I am aware.