Bush & Blair plan Iraq war before going to UN

by April O'Neill Fri Feb 03, 2006 11:22

Why is it such a crime to plan to remove a facist dictator from power before asking the UN?
The majority of people in the West opposed the invasion of Iraq - despite the knowledge that Saddam Hussein was brutal tyrant who tortured and executed hundreds of thousands of his own people, gassed thousands of innocents at Halabjah, invaded Iran and Kuwait and fired ballistic missiles against Saudi Arabia and Israel and that at the time not just the CIA but the entire international intelligence community including France, Russia and China were convinced that Saddam still possessed WMD. Hans Blix found no evidence of WMD but when he spoke before the UN Security Council he complained that Iraq was hampering his investigations and were therefore in breach of resolution 1441 which authorised military action against Iraq in the event that hampered investigations in WMD. Dr. David Kelly did not believe that Iraq possessed stockpiles of WMD but he was convinced that Saddam had the infrastructure in place to commence manufacture as soon as sanctions were lifted - after all through Oil For Food Saddam and his sons were bribing the international diplomatic community with the full knowledge of Kofi Annan in order to lift the sanctions.

If the majority of the international public were prepared to ignore the threat from this tyrant then it was the responsibility of their leaders to press on with what was RIGHT.

They did that - Bush and Blair have now been TOTALLY vindicated by events since then.

Iraq is a constitutional democracy with a strenghtening military and police force and a population of millions who enjoy freedom that apart from Israel and Lebanon and Afghanistan no other nation in the Middle East has been given.

Blair and Bush should be praised for undermining the suicidal appeasement of Saddam Hussein by the UN not condemned.

Hitler was appeased by the League of Nations - WW2 might have been prevented if FDR and Chamberlian had acted sooner.

Bush and Blair learned the lessons of history.

by Big Joe Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:07

My god, you obviously work for the US or British embassy. You are living in a fantasy world. You paint such a ridiculous and naive picture of the situation that it is laughable.. You are out of touch with reality.. You seem to happily gloss over all the lies, deception, murder, destruction, bombings etc with some rosy picture that iraq have a democracy!! So its all ok then, that the iraqies are living in worse conditions since before the war.. installing a muppet democracy does not make it all ok.. Also, what about all the other dictators in the world, why don't yous go after them or was it just the lame duck saddam was an easy target. Oh no, they won't cause they are scared and theres no oil.. I hope the iranians kick there ass.. Bush and blair should stand trial..

by Shannon Wed Feb 15, 2006 21:49

Even if I agreed with you, April, about Bush and Blair being "vindicated" for invading Iraq (which I don't), it doesn't excuse the lies. There were several inteligence reports indicating that there were no "weaponds of mass destruction" in Iraq long before we entered. Since that lie has become public, the governments NEW excuse for being there is the type of leader the country had makes Iraq a country succeptable to harboring terrorist organizations. It's just another excuse, used to frighten the US citizens and salvage what is left of the support for this war.

Now, our defence personal seem to want to take this even farther, and attemt to police the world. I would suggest reading the following link.