Tony Blair responds to the Iraqi war decision.

[Dragonb]

Video from BBC where Tony Blair talks about the decisions to go to war on Iraq.



For those who don't know the Chilcot-rapport which can be found here http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/the-report/ gives massive criticism about the Iraq war and says that it was unnecessary to go to war on Iraq and that more peaceful methods were not considered.

Also a bit more information about the Iraq war from The Guardian https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t0j37P6HXk

[Independent voter]

Meanwhile Bush is down on his ranch flipping burgers on the barbecue and drinking non alcohol beer cause of his drinking problem.

[Deleted]

Meanwhile Bush is down on his ranch flipping burgers on the barbecue and drinking non alcohol beer cause of his drinking problem.

I laughed

Well least Bush managed to enflame American / Muslim tensions for a few decades

[ati87]

god, if I did my actual response it would be more of a rant then anything else.

Even now he defends his choice, he really needs to move to Iraq or just go live in monk temple or something and takes a vow of silence.

[Kalis]

Blair sincere voice activated.

[Deleted]

Yes yes Tony, you disagree that it was a bad decision to remove Saddam. A decade, decade and a half later though, thanks to that "not a bad decision", Iraq is completely destroyed, and we've got Iraqi asylum seekers all the way up here in the streets of Finnish small towns. I'm glad you're all sad about it Tony. How about you come take these asylum seekers over there to Britain, and to the US, the two biggest perpetrators of this mess? Oh, that's right. You and everyone else responsible have skated and are now living out your lives in luxury.

Meanwhile, European countries are shouldering the burden of trying to help the people feeling from a country turned to rubble.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7123121.html

Saddam is gone, but in his place there are 1,000 Saddams

Well done.

[Dragonb]

surprised more people are not talking bout this, seems like a big deal.

[Ripster42]

surprised more people are not talking bout this, seems like a big deal.

Well, it's basically just saying something that was being said 10 years ago. I'm surprised people are making a big deal out of it again just because a new report was released. We've known it was stupid for a long time.

[nonameelf]

I don't think Saddam would have let ISIS run around in Iraq.

[Tijuana]

The Iraqi people brought this on themselves. We could have stayed and maintained the peace but, they refused our help. A heart attack by Saddam would have created the same power vacuum that was created when the US forces left.

Blame us for the war all you want. But blaming us for stuff that happened after we left, when it could have happened at any moment when Saddam died, is intellectually dishonest.

[matt4pack]

So Trump says Saddam was good for Iraq and he gets bashed but at the same time a man responsible for removing him gets bashed by the same people.

So which one is it?

[derpkitteh]

I don't think Saddam would have let ISIS run around in Iraq.

when he was deposed, his army was left to rot. the tops of it joined up with what became ISIS to ride them back to power, that's why they were so deadly, they had actual soldiers leading them.

this shitshow was one of the worst debacles in history, worse than the iranian ordeal back ages ago.

[Deja Thoris]

Saddam was a meanie and killed some of his people but since the Iraq war started over 150k of them have been killed and millions displaced.

Bottom line is Tony Blair and Dubya were worse for the Iraqi people than Saddam could ever have been.

[Deleted]

The Iraqi people brought this on themselves. We could have stayed and maintained the peace but, they refused our help. A heart attack by Saddam would have created the same power vacuum that was created when the US forces left.

Blame us for the war all you want. But blaming us for stuff that happened after we left, when it could have happened at any moment when Saddam died, is intellectually dishonest.

Saddam had sons, and loyalists. Had he died, there wouldn't have been a "power vacuum". That, if anything, is "intellectually dishonest".

[Tijuana]

Saddam had sons, and loyalists. Had he died, there wouldn't have been a "power vacuum". That, if anything, is "intellectually dishonest".

They would have fought over the throne. Hence the term "power vacuum". Your notion that any of them would have been a clear heir, with no other claimants is laughable.

[Deleted]

They would have fought over the throne. Hence the term "power vacuum". Your notion that any of them would have been a clear heir, with no other claimants is laughable.

So what? At least it wouldn't have been expensive for the U.S and Britain.

And for all we know it could have been a rather smooth transition. Too bad we never found out because we made a foolish and erratic decision based on poor intel and a lot of guesswork.

[May90]

I don't think Saddam would have let ISIS run around in Iraq.

Saddam's regime wasn't a big advancement, compared to ISIS, really.