Quote:
Originally Posted by noodlehair
True, and it led to the invasion of a foreign country, using our own troops, and subsequently caused the death of some of those troops, as well as thousands of innocent people. All for reasons that were never fully explained...fantastic.
I don't know that I'd call Blair an extremist nutjob. Wrong or right Iraq was an inevitability, and would have been even if we'd chosen not to get involved. He had to make a decision, made it, then failed to produce the evidence to justify why.
|
George Bush appeared hell bent on that, whether it was to safeguard oil supplies, to carry on what his father failed to finish, or whatever. I think many of us consider the real reason why we went to war was out of some mistaken loyalty to this so-called 'special relationship' between the US and the UK. What has the UK ever gained out of this?
Donald Rumsfeld had already indicated that the US would go it alone if need be in Iraq. We could have backed out of that arena, in the same way that virtually every other country did. The UN eventually stated that the US-led invasion was illegal according to their Charter. Not only will we be involved with a long drawn out conflict in Iraq, there is also Afghanistan. History tells us that no invading country has ever succeeded in Afghanistan, and we have the recent experience of the Russians to remind us. However, to a certain extent, I see more logic for our presence in Afghanistan - as a mission to reduce the supply of illegal opiates into the UK, for example.
Both of these escapades have made the UK a more likely target for extremist reprisals, as we have already witnessed. This would have been anticipated and written into the equation as Blair and his Burnley-supporting puppet master dreamed about weapons of mass destruction as an excuse to get us into this sorry mess.
Sorry Noodles, but Tony Blair warrants consideration as an extremist nutjob in my eyes.