Donate SIGN UP

Does Tony Blair Still Think He Was Right To Invade Iraq?

Avatar Image
pdq1 | 14:16 Tue 26th Feb 2013 | News
59 Answers
In this interview he says he has given up trying to convince others about going to war in Iraq. Is he right and nearly everyone else wrong?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21576509

Full interview on Newsnight BBC2 tonight (Tuesday) 10.30pm
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 59rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by pdq1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The americans did em. Then the UN,France and Germany propped up his murderous regime whilst syphoning off the oil money and profit from construction contracts.
twr

the dog (which we had set up and equipped to bite our enemies) wasn't biting us

He was however keeping his own region in order - including the suppression of terrorists and religious fanatics

He had however committed one sin which in the end proved fatal; he'd tried to kill George W's daddy and threatened to disrupt their 'clan's' oil and chemical businesses
Yep I was there however many millions more supported it however tentatively. I think only about 30% opposed it at the time of the actual invasion. You'd probably struggle to find many admitting that they ever had any level of support for it now.
Anyway, regardless of the rights and wrongs of it Blair isn't the only supporter of the Iraq War to stand by their original position, as the questioner seems to imply.
most people in Britain would think that going to war in Iraq, Afghanistan as a fools errand, and not for the first time we had a politician telling us a pack of lies to get us to engage in a conflict we had no business to be in, costing many many lives, and in Afghanistan this is a war we are never going to win, the Russians came unstuck, and so did we long long ago, so why did they not heed the lessons from then and from the folly of the Russian invasion.
Zeuhl, that 'keeping his region in order' included dropping chemical weapons on the kurds.
there is no doubt Saddam was a despicable man and his hatred of the Kurds, perhaps a swift exit by means of US security forces, or SAS, however that would have destabilised the region even faster, but what are they left with now?
.

I was taken in about the biological weapons

wasnt it Mrs Germ and Dr Anthrax ?

Biological weapons (Anthrax, other bacteria) arent that difficult to produce and well within the capabilities of the educated Iraqis


Anyway it wasnt the war but the dogs dinner of the post war admin that did us in. Part of the issue is that all the Arabists in the Foreign Office were excluded from any planning as they would obviously be pro-Arab.
SO the only planners who were allowed to plan didnt know their a+se from their elbows.
Sticking to the subject of Iraq, while I vehemently disagreed with it, I have no time for the Bliar war criminal nonsense that attended much of the anti-war argument in subsequent years. I believe successive enquiries of various sorts have shown that Blair did not lie to anyone. I believe that the arguments against that war are strong enough without relying on that continued nonsense.
By the way in the subject if who put who in power, Saddam rose to power 'naturally' (for Iraq). The west it is true later supported him in the war with Iran.
/dropping chemical weapons on the kurds./

True doc

but what tiny fraction was the number of Kurd casualties related to the number of civilian deaths caused by our offensive and the ensuing years of anarchy and militia rule?
/Blair did not lie to anyone/

Then he was 'mistaken' to a level of incompetence that is culpable.

It was clear that he was prematurely committed to invasion; influenced by something other than the available facts

From that point, information was distorted to fit the pre-decided agenda and any information to the contrary was suppressed or discredited regardless
That is the dilemma with war zeuhl. goverments on all sides are to blame for the war in iraq. The UN, France and Germany for turning a blind eye to the problem as long as the money rolled in. The US, UK and others for not carrying out their campaign properly as they focused on how to get the money rolling in after the war was over.

I just don't think the atrocities of a psychopathic mass murderer can regarded as keeping things in order.
as mentioned a despicable man, and it wasn't a few Kurds, but genocide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam_Hussein%27s_Iraq
The Kurdish issue affects Turkey too.

In Iraq it is largely an outcome of a rather poor effort by British civil servants in the 1920s to carve up parts of the old Ottoman Empire

A shortcoming that also led to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait
wasn't it Gertrude Bell who invented the name Iraq ?
'caught between Iraq and a hard place.'
indeed pp

She was certainly put in charge of map drawing etc though i think the name itself has some ancient local significance rather than an acronym or Pakistan type invention
isn't Iraq an ancient name?
Which one used to be Persia was it Iraq or Iran ?.
i like ancient history, it is a fascinating subject...

21 to 40 of 59rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Does Tony Blair Still Think He Was Right To Invade Iraq?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.