Removing Saddam was right, even without WMD - Blair

BBC ^ | December 12, 2009

[nuconvert]

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.

[Venturer]

Hans Blix , what a waste of good oxygen that guy is.

[chuck_the_tv_out]

Don’t mistake blair for one of the good guys. He is/was not.

So he’s given some ammunition to the left, and I can’t say I’m surprised.

WMD were found. Others were taken to Syria.

[cripplecreek]

I always thought Blair laid out a better case for removing Hussein than Bush. Blair always concentrated more heavily on the humanitarian reasons.

[Erik Latranyi]

I always thought Blair laid out a better case for removing Hussein than Bush. Blair always concentrated more heavily on the humanitarian reasons.

Don't you know that only a leftist president can engage in humanitarian acts? Conservatives are simply warmongers and don't really care about people in need.

Anything else is an affront to the liberal world-view.

[nuconvert]

“Don’t mistake blair for one of the good guys.”

Nope. I don’t

[True Republican Patriot]

Hans Blix isn’t worth the Electrons or Ink that spells his warped mind!He is only slightly more worth quoting than John F****ng KERRY, The GIGOLO GOOFBALL and AMERICAN TRAITOR< not to mention HANOI’S Premier WAR HERO!!..:-)

[Son House]

Yep, much better then Clinton#1 letting Saddam have open season firing on our Military Pilots in the UN no-fly-zone. That was an act of War Clinton refused to respond to with overwhelming force and not leave ‘a mess’ as Obama would charge Bush with

[left that other site]

“humanitarian reasons.”

People have forgotten the INCREDIBLE Human Rights Abuses of Saddam’s Regime.

Also the WMD (Poison Gas) attacks on Shia, Kurdish, and dissenting people groups. (also during the Iraq-Iran War)

Not to metion the 17 UN Resolutions that Saddan defied.

Or the constant violations of the No-Fly Zone.

Or the Government PLOT to Assassinate a Former American President

Or the probable link to the Oklahoma City Bombing

Or the MASSIVE Environmental Carbon Footprint and major pollution of the atmosphere and the Persian Gulf after Gulf War I.

Not to mention the rape, torture, and brutalization of Iraq’s citizens,

AND the simple fact that EVERYONE, including the LIBERALS in Congress, believed that Saddam had WMD. (and I think he did. They are probably in Syria now)

But those are just pesky facts.

[Paco]

If Saddam were still there we'd have a massive arms race going between Iran & Iraq. What would have been the cost of that? What is the cost when sworn enemies share a border and are willing to use WMD's on each other?

I'm sick and tired of these idiots saying that going into Iraq was wrong, etc. That move by Bush was the smartest decision he made. We're in an excellent military position to take action on Iran (if anyone had the 'nads to do it) and no longer have to worry about a nuclear Iraq. BIG, BIG WIN for the US & the west despite the huge political cost to Bush.

[bunkerhill7]

Wait! I thought Sadam was a WMD - Weapon of Mass Dysfunction.

[Sarajevo]

If Saddam were still there we'd have a massive arms race going between Iran & Iraq.

Versus the regional instability we have now? At least Saddam kept these tribal nutcases under his thumb and he was a known quantity.

We're in an excellent military position to take action on Iran

Do you really think so? Forces in Iraq are drawing down, yet there is still no political instability in the country. Iraq is weak. Syria and Iran are just waiting for us to leave so they can pounce.

[Canedawg]

“WMD were found. Others were taken to Syria.”
* * *

Why didn’t/couldn’t Bush make a point of saying that?

[chuck_the_tv_out]

““WMD were found. Others were taken to Syria.”
* * *
Why didn’t/couldn’t Bush make a point of saying that?”

I don’t know. I sometimes wonder if it’s all an elaborate game, playing one group off against another to gain total control, “sometimes men stumble on the truth but dust themselves off” etc.

[ex-snook]

Yep sure made a lot of sense to take out Iraq the enemy of Iran. With a threatening Iran, taking out the Iraq bulwark was really a good idea. Good long range strategic planning, we are a lot safer now, right?

[left that other site]

The objectives in Iraq were achieved. Saddam was removed. The people had elections. What they do with it now is their business.

Since there are obviously no massive free oil shipments coming from Iraq as we speak, I guess it wasn’t a “War For Oil” after all.

What is going on there NOW is a proxy war with Iran. The “insurgents” are being supplied and trained by Iran (and probably by extension, the “former” Soviet Union.)

This is the opinion of some of my friends who have just returned from there. Since they have served “up close and personal”, I am inclined to believe them.

[Islaminaction]

Blair is still an idiot that bows to Islam.

[Islaminaction]

Nation building is the biggest mistake Bush ever made. Also in the long run fighting them over there and allowing Islam to advance here makes little sense. Same goes for the UK.