Never any WMD in Iraq and we knew it.

[pap]

In news that'll shock no-one, the security services of both the US and UK were told by top sources that Iraq had "virtually nothing" in the way of WMD.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/18/panorama-iraq-fresh-wmd-claims

 

Tonight's Panorama will focus on the issue.

 

This just adds more fuel to the "Bush and pals wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11" argument, imo.

[Viking Warrior]

so where did al the mustard gas, nerve egents and cyanide disappear to . Perhaps syria ? Saddam did have them which he used long after gulf war one

[Jonnyboy]

I thought Iraq destroyed a lot under observation of Hans Blix etc in order to relieve sanctions,

[View From The Top]

so where did al the mustard gas, nerve egents and cyanide disappear to . Perhaps syria ? Saddam did have them which he used long after gulf war one

 

He never used owt after 1991.

[pap]

Getting into the Middle East has been on the agenda since the Iron Curtain collapsed, for tons of reasons. First off, we can't be approaching world peace. You people need an enemy. We can't really pick on anyone that can actually beat us, that'd be no fun either. It's also well worth remembering that a sizeable proportion of Bush Jr's government signed up to Rebuilding America's Defenses, a paper produced by right-wing think tank Project For a New American Century. Their stated aims were to get the US into multiple, simultaneous theatre wars and prevent any rival superpower ( e.g. China ) from emerging.

 

Date of publication? September 2000.

 

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

[jjsaint]

He certainly did have WMD at one point, but saw how ineffective they were & got rid. Glad he's gone but should have been done as a covert assassination rather than a war that tore the country apart.

[pap]

He certainly did have WMD at one point, but saw how ineffective they were & got rid. Glad he's gone but should have been done as a covert assassination rather than a war that tore the country apart.

 

He didn't have any at the time of the invasion. This was known, confirmed and corroborated ahead of time. Governments knowingly lied to get us to go to war. Leaving aside the huge death toll ( well over a million dead as a result of this war ), another huge problem with the aftermath of the invasion was the emergence of sectarian groups.

 

Then let's not forget all the crap we've caught in the West as a result of surrendering any moral authority.

 

Sorry, the "he was a bad man" thing doesn't square it for me. There are plenty of dictators that we have no problem cosying up to. Saudi Arabia, one of our biggest allies in the region, is a shockingly oppressive country. Their answer to the Arab Spring problem is to shoot protestors. We're not going after them, are we?

[Viking Warrior]

he continued to butcher the kurds and then dispalced the marsh arabs, and that was post 1991 .

The report the guardian. is interesting i think it was the guardian . states he had no active wmd , doesnt say they didnt have any though

[pap]

he continued to butcher the kurds and then dispalced the marsh arabs, and that was post 1991 .

The report the guardian. is interesting i think it was the guardian . states he had no active wmd , doesnt say they didnt have any though

 

Saddam was an amateur in the butchery department compared to the "shoot anything that moves" 2003 invasion force. The highest estimate of deaths attributed to Saddam over his entire tenure is just shy of 200K.

 

US and UK intervention caused five times that number in three years.

[View From The Top]

he continued to butcher the kurds and then dispalced the marsh arabs, and that was post 1991 .

The report the guardian. is interesting i think it was the guardian . states he had no active wmd , doesnt say they didnt have any though

 

They didn't have any which is why the were never found. What he did to the Kurds and Marsh Arabs post '91 is not linked in any way to WMD.

 

Not a single person who served out there believes they had any.

 

This nation was taken to war on a lie & the people behind it should be on trial in the Hague.

[pap]

They didn't have any which is why the were never found. What he did to the Kurds and Marsh Arabs post '91 is not linked in any way to WMD.

 

Not a single person who served out there believes they had any.

 

This nation was taken to war on a lie & the people behind it should be on trial in the Hague.

 

Hear hear.

 

I know that there is an element of "once you take the Queen's shilling, etc" with you Forces types. I'd also imagine that a good deal of you sign up because you genuinely love and believe in our country. Our forces deserve a damn sight better than being turned into bad guys by huge feck-off lies.

[Toadhall Saint]

They didn't have any which is why the were never found. What he did to the Kurds and Marsh Arabs post '91 is not linked in any way to WMD.

 

Not a single person who served out there believes they had any.

 

This nation was taken to war on a lie & the people behind it should be on trial in the Hague.

 

Bout sums it up for me too. We would have never gone there if they only sold carrots - its all about the oil.

[hypochondriac]

I don't know enough to know for certain whether he used to have WMDs or not. I'm glad we got rid of Saddam though.

[Sheaf Saint]

Getting into the Middle East has been on the agenda since the Iron Curtain collapsed, for tons of reasons. First off, we can't be approaching world peace. You people need an enemy. We can't really pick on anyone that can actually beat us, that'd be no fun either. It's also well worth remembering that a sizeable proportion of Bush Jr's government signed up to Rebuilding America's Defenses, a paper produced by right-wing think tank Project For a New American Century. Their stated aims were to get the US into multiple, simultaneous theatre wars and prevent any rival superpower ( e.g. China ) from emerging.

 

Date of publication? September 2000.

 

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

 

From page 50/51 of that document....

 

A transformation strategy that solely

pursued capabilities for projecting force

from the United States, for example, and

sacrificed forward basing and presence,

would be at odds with larger American

policy goals and would trouble American

allies. Further, the process of transformation,

even if it brings revolutionary change, is

likely to be a long one, absent some

catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a

new Pearl Harbor

 

Exactly one year later, after Bush and his band of neo-cons had taken power, they got their new Pearl Harbor.

 

Coincidence???

[Sheaf Saint]

I don't know enough to know for certain whether he used to have WMDs or not. I'm glad we got rid of Saddam though.

 

Yeah because Iraq is a much safer place for all of its citizens now isn't it. Oh, hang on... no it isn't.

 

He may have been a deluded nutter who loved to antagonise the west, but given the sectarian war that has claimed so many lives since his removal, it's hard to argue against his claim that "The only way to rule Iraq is with an iron fist."

 

Saddam was no threat to us. He was, however, a threat to America's economic strategy of printing worthless dollars to buy oil from the middle east, because he decided he wanted to be paid in Euros instead.

[aintforever]

Blair should face trial for the way we were spun into war, it doesn't make any difference if we think Iraq is better off without Saddam. There are loads of countries who would be better off with different people in charge, that is no excuse for murdering hundreds of thousands of people.

 

I you remember rightly the US and UK were itching for a war, for ages it was a threat of war if they didn't let the weapons inspectors in. Then they let them in and they were withdrawn before they could finish their job.

 

Then Blair claimed there was evidence of WMDs, but we were not allowed to see it because it was sensitive - now it turns out we were not allowed to see it because it didn't exist (or was just the ramblings of a couple of people).

 

The problem is there is no way Blair or Bush will face jail because there are so many layers of people to take the blame.

[Sheaf Saint]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/secret-memos-expose-link-between-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html

 

* Tony Blair, 6 February 2003: "Let me just deal with the oil thing because... the oil conspiracy theory is honestly one of the most absurd when you analyse it. The fact is that, if the oil that Iraq has were our concern, I mean we could probably cut a deal with Saddam tomorrow in relation to the oil. It's not the oil that is the issue, it is the weapons..."

 

The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities in Iraq "post regime change". Its minutes state: "Iraq is the big oil prospect. BP is desperate to get in there and anxious that political deals should not deny them the opportunity."

 

After another meeting, this one in October 2002, the Foreign Office's Middle East director at the time, Edward Chaplin, noted: "Shell and BP could not afford not to have a stake in [iraq] for the sake of their long-term future... We were determined to get a fair slice of the action for UK companies in a post-Saddam Iraq."

 

Whereas BP was insisting in public that it had "no strategic interest" in Iraq, in private it told the Foreign Office that Iraq was "more important than anything we've seen for a long time".

[pap]

From page 50/51 of that document....

 

Exactly one year later, after Bush and his band of neo-cons had taken power, they got their new Pearl Harbor.

 

Coincidence???

 

They had plans for Iraq before 9/11. Interesting read below.

 

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/new-documents-show-bush-administration-plan

 

Everything about Bush Jr's presidency stank. Stolen election, massively hawkish from the start, wilfully abandoning the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, attacks on civil liberties, the utter indifference shown during Hurricane Katrina or indeed, the response on 9/11.

 

Let's not forget the fact the bloke was a f**king idiot. I do not know many people who are less intelligent than George W Bush appeared to be. He was President because someone wanted him to be President. No true patriot wants a moron for their head of state. You'd only really want a moron in place if he wasn't going to be making many decisions. Even during his campaign, he presented himself as a C student with good advisors. When you look at the correlation between PNAC members, the Bush Administration and the calamity that quickly befell their country as they took office, it's not unreasonable to ask whether it is a coincidence.

[pap]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/secret-memos-expose-link-between-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html

 

You do not involve major corporations in clandestine Foreign Office deals unless you know it's happening. We've proven beyond all reasonable doubt that there was a conspiracy to get us into Iraq. The real question is what we do about it.

 

My view is that Blair has to go the Hague. His deception is a massive stain on our national culture, which is supposed to be based on fair play. Instead, we're proven liars on the global stage. Everything we say is suspect, because our PM jumped into bed with old-school fascists and lied to his country to further their agenda. We need to recognise that he lied, acknowledge the grisly consequences, face up to our own part in this mess and pack the f**ker off to the Netherlands. It's not like he'd even be a sacrificial lamb; he's guilty as hell and should not escape punishment just because he happened to run our country.

Edited 18 March, 2013 by pap

[Dark Munster]

Bout sums it up for me too. We would have never gone there if they only sold carrots - its all about the oil.

Operation Iraqi Liberation. Bit of a giveaway, in hindsight.

[Chez]

The problem is there is no way Blair or Bush will face jail because there are so many layers of people to take the blame.

within those layers of people to blame are there not the actual people to blame?

[Puddings and Monkeys]

Apart from the activists at both ends of the spectrum, I don't think the general population really give a toss about it now. If it wasn't for the 10th anniversary hardly anyone would be talking about it. And those self-appointed custodians of our country's reputation need to stop taking themselves so seriously...stain on our country etc etc. Plus ca change - those people who hated us before this started still hate us, and those who liked us before still like us. Twas ever thus and ever more shall be.

[OldNick]

Blair should be prosecuted for murder IMo

[pap]

Apart from the activists at both ends of the spectrum, I don't think the general population really give a toss about it now. If it wasn't for the 10th anniversary hardly anyone would be talking about it. And those self-appointed custodians of our country's reputation need to stop taking themselves so seriously...stain on our country etc etc. Plus ca change - those people who hated us before this started still hate us, and those who liked us before still like us. Twas ever thus and ever more shall be.

 

You could say the same about any issue in politics. The general public is notoriously apathetic.

 

Perhaps you are happy to be a citizen of a country of liars and lapdogs. I'm not.

[dubai_phil]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9933587/The-myth-of-shock-and-awe-why-the-Iraqi-invasion-was-a-disaster.html

 

Interesting how the whole invasion was an Intelligence disaster as well as the reasons to do it.

 

And a very b1tchy but accurate final comment on what they actually achieved

Edited 19 March, 2013 by dubai_phil

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9933587/The-myth-of-shock-and-awe-why-the-Iraqi-invasion-was-a-disaster.html

 

Interesting how the whole invasion was an Intelligence disaster as well as the reasons to do it.

 

And a very b1tchy but accurate final comment on what they actually achieved

 

in a nutshell. what an almighty f(ck up.

[pap]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9933587/The-myth-of-shock-and-awe-why-the-Iraqi-invasion-was-a-disaster.html

 

Interesting how the whole invasion was an Intelligence disaster as well as the reasons to do it.

 

And a very b1tchy but accurate final comment on what they actually achieved

 

in a nutshell. what an almighty f(ck up.

 

I think the Bush administration would have loved to have a go at Iran. They put them on the Axis of Evil ( FFS, it sounds like the villains from an 80s kids cartoon ) quick smart. At the time, and with a relatively new Supreme Leader, the Iranians made overtures to the US on a number of issues. Their price? Just wanted to be taken of the "Axis of Evil" thing.

 

I don't personally think we have anything to fear from Iran. Say whatever you like about that regime; it has never acted as an aggressor ( despite what Dubai Phil might tell you about the Tunb Islands that were occupied pre-revolution ). I think their intent is to get the bomb and say "don't f**k with us". If I were in their shoes, with US forces on either side of me, I'd probably be thinking about doing the same.

[Puddings and Monkeys]

You could say the same about any issue in politics. The general public is notoriously apathetic.

 

Perhaps you are happy to be a citizen of a country of liars and lapdogs. I'm not.

 

I actually take offence to you calling me a liar and lapdog. I'm English and proud of it, but that doesn't mean I am blind to the idiocy of politicians (of all colours) and the stupid things they do. You're free to go and live somewhere else if you want to, but good luck finding a country that hasn't been run by politicians who do things for their own personal gain - the list is very very short.

[aintforever]

in a nutshell. what an almighty f(ck up.

 

I bet the operation to secure and take over the oil production was planned thoroughly and executed perfectly.

[pap]

I actually take offence to you calling me a liar and lapdog. I'm English and proud of it, but that doesn't mean I am blind to the idiocy of politicians (of all colours) and the stupid things they do. You're free to go and live somewhere else if you want to, but good luck finding a country that hasn't been run by politicians who do things for their own personal gain - the list is very very short.

 

I'm not calling you a lapdog or a liar. Blair was both, and for a time, was in charge of this country.

 

Political malfeasance is nothing new; as you point out - I'd have a hard time finding a country where this doesn't happen. However, we normally punish it when we find it. By leaving Blair untouched, we give tacit approval to his actions. He is a war criminal and he should be tried.

[eurosaint]

He didn't have any at the time of the invasion. This was known, confirmed and corroborated ahead of time. Governments knowingly lied to get us to go to war. Leaving aside the huge death toll ( well over a million dead as a result of this war ), another huge problem with the aftermath of the invasion was the emergence of sectarian groups.

Then let's not forget all the crap we've caught in the West as a result of surrendering any moral authority.

 

Sorry, the "he was a bad man" thing doesn't square it for me. There are plenty of dictators that we have no problem cosying up to. Saudi Arabia, one of our biggest allies in the region, is a shockingly oppressive country. Their answer to the Arab Spring problem is to shoot protestors. We're not going after them, are we?

 

TBF these groups have been at each others throats for centuries, the tribal culture in the middle east is the main reason why it will (at least in my lifetime!) always be a hotbed of hatred and violence ! Add in the undemocratic nature of most (maybe even all?) of their governments and it's easy to see why it's a volatile, unpredictable and often dangerous part of the world !

I have travelled extensively but mostly flew over the middle east, I reckon that this is good advice for most of us !!

[scotty]

Apart from the activists at both ends of the spectrum, I don't think the general population really give a toss about it now. If it wasn't for the 10th anniversary hardly anyone would be talking about it. And those self-appointed custodians of our country's reputation need to stop taking themselves so seriously...stain on our country etc etc. Plus ca change - those people who hated us before this started still hate us, and those who liked us before still like us. Twas ever thus and ever more shall be.

 

Speak for yourself. I've been furious about it since the invasion, and I am not an activist. Blair should be hung from the same noose they used on saddam.

[pap]

TBF these groups have been at each others throats for centuries, the tribal culture in the middle east is the main reason why it will (at least in my lifetime!) always be a hotbed of hatred and violence ! Add in the undemocratic nature of most (maybe even all?) of their governments and it's easy to see why it's a volatile, unpredictable and often dangerous part of the world !

I have travelled extensively but mostly flew over the middle east, I reckon that this is good advice for most of us !!

 

I completely agree with your point on tribalism, eurosaint; the British Empire was essentially built on exploiting the tribal culture. My grandfather, who hails from Karachi, has it running through him like letters in seaside rock. Very distrustful of outsiders and a lot of faith in his own people. And by own people, I really mean his paternal family. Blood trumps all other considerations.

 

You're on shakier ground with your claim that their undemocratic nature leads to sectarian violence. You might be okay saying that their lack of democratic tradition means that they're less open to other viewpoints, but it's the dictatorships that have essentially kept sectarian violence under wraps. It was when Saddam and pals power base was removed that the sectarian sh!t really hit the fan.

[Viking Warrior]

Blair was a liar about the invasion. lots of theories about some correct and some not

 

But did any off the Chemicals get shipped to syria as the russians are concerned at this latest escalation in syria, on the news now

Syrian state media say rebels fighting to topple President Bashar al-Assad have fired a chemical weapon in the north of the country.

 

"Terrorists launched a missile containing chemical products into the region of Khan al-Assal in the province of Aleppo, killing 15 people, mainly civilians," Sana news agency said.

 

The government routinely refers to rebels as "terrorists".

 

Rebels denied the report, accusing the government of using chemical agents.

 

"We were hearing reports from early this morning about a regime attack on Khan al-Assal, and we believe they fired a Scud with chemical agents," a senior rebel and spokesman for the Higher Military Council in Aleppo, Qassim Saadeddine, told Reuters news agency.