Yeah, I think that the whole WMD thing was a contrived excuse for sure and any dissenters were silenced or bypassed.
It is easy to speculate that chaos, post war, was what they wanted, or maybe they were just indifferent to it.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (07 Jul 2016 10.33am)

It's a good story.

To sum up my attitude, When I saw the pictures of Saddam being hung I felt a real sense of disgust.
He was a ruthless man by all accounts and one who probably had no conscience with regard to killing his enemies or people who stepped out of line. Even so, to see him as a helpless man being essentially used as a pawn by the West and ultimately hung by the neck by as a gift to the Iraqi people, gave me a very uneasy feeling. I felt the same with Gaddafi.

It is not hindsight. Millions of people knew before the war (30 million marched round the world, of which I was one). Robin Cook got it exactly right. it makes me so angry that they went ahead anyway and that Blair still will not admit his culpability.
Corbyn was right at the time but I don't hear anyone giving him the credit for it now.
Millions are suffering still because of Blair/Bush. I hope to live to see the day they are before the war crimes tribunal where they belong.

Although I have no time for Tony Blair,the problem with all this that it is easy to judge the actions of individuals but impossible to judge inaction.

Bush decided he wanted to get rid of Saddam and Blair went along for better or worse. We perceive the aftermath to be worse because we see a direct link between the actions of Bush and Blair and today's more complicated dangerous world. However we cannot predict or evaluate the price of their inaction because it didn't happen that way.
It is not a argument to support their decisions to invade Iraq but we must view them in the context of the time and without hindsight. We must also acknowledge that although we might all have our pet theories about what happened and why, myself included, none of us really have the bigger picture that Bush and Blair would have. Of course that bigger picture might have been the wrong picture provided by advisors that had their own agendas.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (07 Jul 2016 10.06am)

I can't know the specifics any more than you can but it is easy for those opposed to something to claim the moral high ground or say I told you so if things are perceived to have gone badly.

If you are someone who is prepared to march against a war, then I suspect you are someone who might object to any sort of military intervention. You can correct me on that if you feel the need.

Many of us had our doubts about the Iraq war but we elected the government and their advisors to make our decisions for us. Should we have had a referendum on it? Are any of us more qualified to decide?
Blair will be judged by history and by his own conscience but if were looking for someone to blame, I'd look toward the Bush administration.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (07 Jul 2016 12.32pm)

He already has been, it happened yesterday, and he was found to be a f**king weasel cocked deceiving, lying c**t.

Government manipulation of media shocker!

[Link]