Removing Saddam was right, even without WMD - Blair

[deathfromabove]

Removing Saddam was right, even without WMD - Blair​

It would have been right to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein even without evidence he had weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Tony Blair has said.

The former prime minister said it was the "notion" of Saddam as a threat to the region which tilted him in favour of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

But his words have attracted critics - among them Hans Blix, who was in charge of the UN team searching Iraq for WMD.

He said he thought Mr Blair used WMD as a "convenient justification" for war.

"Saddam's removal was a gain but it's the only gain that I can see from the war," said Mr Blix.

Speaking on BBC One's Fern Britton Meets programme, Tony Blair was asked whether he would still have gone on with plans to join the US-led invasion had he known at the time that there were no WMD.

He said: "I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments, about the nature of the threat."

He added: "I can't really think we'd be better with him and his two sons still in charge, but it's incredibly difficult..

"That's why I sympathise with the people who were against [the war] for perfectly good reasons and are against it now, but for me, you know, in the end I had to take the decision."

Asked whether it was the idea of Saddam having WMDs which had tilted him in favour of war, Mr Blair said it was "the notion of him as a threat to the region of which the development of WMDs was obviously one" aspect.

'Worth it'

He added that there had been "12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject" of Iraq's weapons and that Saddam had "used chemical weapons on his own people, so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind - the threat to the region".

Meanwhile, Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, backed Mr Blair's stance.

The foreign minister, a member of a government brought into being as a result of the invasion, was a senior Kurdish official during the 1990s.

In 1988 Saddam attacked the Kurds in northern Iraq using chemical weapons.

Mr Zebari told the BBC: "As Iraqis who have gone through the suffering and the agony of Saddam Hussein's regime, we support Tony Blair's statement.

"I believe it was worth it. I believe Saddam Hussein's regime was an affront to the international community, to the international consciousness because of the atrocities, the crimes, he has committed."

But Mr Blix disagreed, saying he believed Mr Blair's statement had a "strong impression of a lack of sincerity".

"The war was sold on the weapons of mass destruction, and now you feel, or hear that it was only a question of deployment of arguments, as he said, it sounds a bit like a fig leaf that was held up, and if the fig leaf had not been there, then they would have tried to put another fig leaf there."

Mr Blix added that the weapon inspectors were "pretty close" to showing that after 700 inspections, that there were no WMDs.

Cabinet support

Conservative MP Richard Ottoway, a member of Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, said Mr Blair's comments were a "cynical ploy to soften up public opinion" before his appearance at the Iraq Inquiry.

Mr Ottoway added that Mr Blair had misled parliament on "more than one occasion" and that people would be "dismayed" that what was the "most significant foreign affairs initiative since World War II had been debated on a false premise".

He added that some MPs may had made a different decision had they known the "full unvarnished truth".

Former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell agreed, saying he would have failed to obtain the support of the House of Commons.

Reg Keys, the father of a British soldier killed in Iraq in 2003, said he was "absolutely flabbergasted" at Mr Blair's statement and that he thought Mr Blair was trying to "struggling to find some moral high ground in order to justify the total farce of the Iraq invasion".

And Carol Turner of the Stop the War Coalition said it was "extraordinary" that Mr Blair was admitting that he was prepared to tailor his arguments to fit the circumstances.

"It's not a matter of applauding his honesty now; it's a matter of attacking his lack of honesty and integrity in the circumstances."

Mr Blair is set to be the key witness to the Iraq inquiry, which is looking at the whole build-up to the war and its conduct and aftermath.

BBC News - Removing Saddam was right, even without WMD - Blair

 

[wild peace]

Fern Britton: Blair on invading Iraq if it had NO WMDs – yes but, …
December 12, 2009 by keeptonyblairforpm

BREAKING: The Iraqi government’s Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, says he supports Blair on removing Saddam (video clip of Blair interview.) Meanwhile anti-Iraq war campaigners are “shocked” over Blair’s words. Well, fancy that! I’m shocked.

‘Tony Blair admits: I would have invaded Iraq anyway’

Removing Saddam was right, even without WMD - Blair

It would have been right to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein even without evidence he had weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Tony Blair has said.

The former prime minister said it was the "notion" of Saddam as a threat to the region which tilted him in favour of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

But his words have attracted critics - among them Hans Blix, who was in charge of the UN team searching Iraq for WMD.

He said he thought Mr Blair used WMD as a "convenient justification" for war.

"Saddam's removal was a gain but it's the only gain that I can see from the war," said Mr Blix.



I sympathise with the people who were against... but you know, in the end I had to take the decision

Tony Blair
Analysis: Blair's bombshell

Speaking on BBC One's Fern Britton Meets programme, Tony Blair was asked whether he would still have gone on with plans to join the US-led invasion had he known at the time that there were no WMD.

He said: "I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments, about the nature of the threat."

He added: "I can't really think we'd be better with him and his two sons still in charge, but it's incredibly difficult..

"That's why I sympathise with the people who were against [the war] for perfectly good reasons and are against it now, but for me, you know, in the end I had to take the decision."

Asked whether it was the idea of Saddam having WMDs which had tilted him in favour of war, Mr Blair said it was "the notion of him as a threat to the region of which the development of WMDs was obviously one" aspect.

'Worth it'

He added that there had been "12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject" of Iraq's weapons and that Saddam had "used chemical weapons on his own people, so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind - the threat to the region".

Meanwhile, Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, backed Mr Blair's stance.

The foreign minister, a member of a government brought into being as a result of the invasion, was a senior Kurdish official during the 1990s.

In 1988 Saddam attacked the Kurds in northern Iraq using chemical weapons.

Mr Zebari told the BBC: "As Iraqis who have gone through the suffering and the agony of Saddam Hussein's regime, we support Tony Blair's statement.

"I believe it was worth it. I believe Saddam Hussein's regime was an affront to the international community, to the international consciousness because of the atrocities, the crimes, he has committed."

But Mr Blix disagreed, saying he believed Mr Blair's statement had a "strong impression of a lack of sincerity".

"The war was sold on the weapons of mass destruction, and now you feel, or hear that it was only a question of deployment of arguments, as he said, it sounds a bit like a fig leaf that was held up, and if the fig leaf had not been there, then they would have tried to put another fig leaf there."

Mr Blix added that the weapon inspectors were "pretty close" to showing that after 700 inspections, that there were no WMDs.

Cabinet support

Conservative MP Richard Ottoway, a member of Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, said Mr Blair's comments were a "cynical ploy to soften up public opinion" before his appearance at the Iraq Inquiry.

Reg Keys: "I think he's trying to soften his approach to make himself look less guilty"

Mr Ottoway added that Mr Blair had misled parliament on "more than one occasion" and that people would be "dismayed" that what was the "most significant foreign affairs initiative since World War II had been debated on a false premise".

He added that some MPs may had made a different decision had they known the "full unvarnished truth".

Former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell agreed, saying he would have failed to obtain the support of the House of Commons.

Reg Keys, the father of a British soldier killed in Iraq in 2003, said he was "absolutely flabbergasted" at Mr Blair's statement and that he thought Mr Blair was trying to "struggling to find some moral high ground in order to justify the total farce of the Iraq invasion".

And Carol Turner of the Stop the War Coalition said it was "extraordinary" that Mr Blair was admitting that he was prepared to tailor his arguments to fit the circumstances.

"It's not a matter of applauding his honesty now; it's a matter of attacking his lack of honesty and integrity in the circumstances."

Mr Blair is set to be the key witness to the Iraq inquiry, which is looking at the whole build-up to the war and its conduct and aftermath.

Fern Britton Meets... Tony Blair is on BBC One on Sunday at 1000 GMT.

 

[wild peace]

ARYNEWS


World
Blair defends Iraq war, even without WMD
Updated : Saturday December 12 , 2009 7:57:47 PM

LONDON: Britain would have backed the invasion of Iraq even if it knew that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), former British premier Tony Blair said in comments released Saturday.

Blair, who is to appear before a long-awaited official Iraq war inquiry early next year, said London would have used other ways to justify its support for the 2003 US-led war to oust the Iraqi leader.

"I would still have thought it right to remove him. Obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments, about the nature of the threat," he told the BBC.

"I can't really think we'd be better with him and his two sons still in charge but it's incredibly difficult," he added, according to comments released before the programme was broadcast on Sunday.

Blair said: "It was the notion of him as a threat to the region, of which the development of WMD was obviously one, and because you'd had 12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject, he used chemical weapons on his own people -- so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind."

Blair, who controversially backed then US president George W. Bush in the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, accepted that families of those who died blamed him, but insisted relatives of soldiers could be proud of their sacrifice.

"You know there are parents who feel very, very, deeply angry and resentful and believe that the war was not worth it," he said.

But he added: "It's also important to understand that many of those who are in the armed forces... they are very often proud of what their child has done and proud of the cause they fought in, so you've got to be."

The former premier also stressed the importance of his Christian faith -- and explained why he did not convert to Catholicism until after he left office in 2007.

"There would have been endless hassle," he said.

"Maybe I should just have done it but, to be frank, you have got so much going on as prime minister and there are so many issues you are having to deal with, that you really wonder whether it's a great idea to put the whole Catholic versus the established church (Church of England) thing into it.

"I had enough controversy to deal with."

The former head of Britain's centre-left Liberal Democrats party, Menzies Campbell, said Saturday that parliament would unlikely have backed the war if lawmakers knew there were no WMD in Iraq.

"He (Blair) would not have obtained the endorsement of the House of Commons on March 18, 2003 if he had been as frank with the House of Commons then as he appears to be willing to be frank with the BBC now," Campbell said.

Blair is expected to appear before the so-called Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war -- which opened last month, after almost all British forces left the country this year -- early in 2010, possibly in January.

 

[Little Falcon]

Believe me or Not this invasion was impossible if Arabs (Neighbors) has not allowed it. And they allowed it because Saddam invaded Kuwait which indeed was wrong. But in my opinion if any Muslims have problem between them, they should not take help or invite others.