This article from the new york times is eye opening about how rampant the Iraqi s were manufacturing chemical weapons from companies backed by Egypt, italy, spain, germany and the US. There is even a video of Sadam meeting with Rumsfiled in the 80,s selling him weapons. He just could not develop a system of delivery, that could go far beyond his border. He only used them locally, cause that is all he was able to do. If he could deliver them to Isreal, he would have. This seems to be an honest look at what was going on.
WoMD ... so where are they?
That's a coincidence Cofty game me some great advice by PM too. He said to me: "fuck off" - SBF
Sadly you didn't take my advice.
Blair was committed to uncritical support of Bush.
It is unfair to criticise MI6. Chilcot made clear that Blair carefully selected the intelligence he wanted and rejected the rest.
It is clear that Saddam did have WMD previously, he had used Sarin gas against the Kurds. That was a hideous war crime. But in my opinion Blair lacked the pragmatism that is necessary for a national leader. Saddam was contained. UN weapons inspectors were being allowed to do their job and they were finding nothing. Of course devoid of all other factors it was morally right to eliminate Saddam but in the real world he should have been kept on a short leash. The cost of war was always going to be too high and there was no sensible plan for the aftermath.
How do you bring peace to a region ruled by a culture that has no interest in fairness and democracy?
We already knew Iraq had WoMD's because "we" still had the receipts. The weapons used on the Kurds were US made. Exports included Anthrax.
What Blair et al are guilty of is wilfully ignoring the complete story of the evidence to pursue an invasion that they had already decided on.
If we're genuinely concerned about the use of weapons by regressive and oppressive regimes then we should stop selling and supplying them.
The whole Iraq / Saddam fiasco was a disaster created by the great idiot Reagan, just some of the crimes committed by his administration.
According to Robert Fisk in "The Great War For Civilisation" America was providing satellite images of Iranian troop movements to Saddam for years during the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam was using this information to deliver chemical attacks.
Yes, they effectively loaded the gun and pointed the weapon - the fact that some stooge pulled the trigger doesn't absolve them of guilt. All the while Rumsfeld and co were making accusations against Saddam and THEY were the ones on the other side dealing in WoMDs !
Man, what a mess Raegan was. They really should smash and destroy every statue and painting of that murder-dealing moron. That's before you even get to the misery he created at home with the nonsense of trickle down economics and the lurch to the right with guns because of his pet Scalia.
It is unfair to criticise MI6 - I agree with this, I think.
Certainly the weapons inspectors, such as Dr David Kelly, were blameless - doing their job thoroughly as usual. I'm not sure who the head of MI6 was at the time (was it Dearlove or Scarlett?) or whether he was in on Downing Street's little game. But it seems Blair, the odious Alastair Campbell and other forgotten miscreants were ignoring recent intelligence reports in late 2002/early 2003 and were sexing up language (turning 'Saddam may have the capability' into 'Saddam has the capability') to take the UK to war. As Ming Campbell said: "the UK was taken to war on a flawed prospectus".
I hope the Chilcot inquirery makes it possible for Blair to face prosecution. Saddam was a monster but he kept a lid on the lunatics and so was preferable over Islamic terrorist groups.