Blair Would Have Invaded Iraq Even Without WMD Issue
No longer in public office, Tony Blair has acknowledged in a BBC interview that he would have invaded Iraq and disposed of Saddam Hussein with or without evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
No longer in public office, Tony Blair has acknowledged in a BBC interview that he would have invaded Iraq and disposed of Saddam Hussein with or without evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. –JCL
Rooted in Truth.The Guardian:
Tony Blair has said he would have invaded Iraq even without evidence of weapons of mass destruction and would have found a way to justify the war to parliament and the public.
The former prime minister made the confession during an interview with Fern Britton, to be broadcast on Sunday on BBC1, in which he said he would still have thought it right to remove Saddam Hussein from power.
“If you had known then that there were no WMDs, would you still have gone on?” Blair was asked. He replied: “I would still have thought it right to remove him [Saddam Hussein]”.
Significantly, Blair added: “I mean obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat.” He continued: “I can’t really think we’d be better with him and his two sons in charge, but it’s incredibly difficult. That’s why I sympathise with the people who were against it [the war] for perfectly good reasons and are against it now, but for me, in the end I had to take the decision.”
Independent by Design.
Your support helps ensure that rigorous reporting, thoughtful analysis, and investigative journalism remain accessible to everyone.
Support independent journalism.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.