Wednesday, 6 October 2004

Tony Blair and Weapons of Mass Destruction

'The threat that Saddam Hussein poses is an issue in its own right, because the reason why the UN Security Council passed these resolutions was precisely because we know the threat that there is from the weapons of mass destruction that he has.' (24/09/02)

"We are asked now seriously to accept that in the last few years -- contrary to all history, contrary to all intelligence -- Saddam decided unilaterally to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd." (18/03/03)

"I have always said to people throughout that our aim has not been regime change, our aim has been the elimination of weapons of mass destruction." (25/03/04)

"I have no doubt that we will [find WMDs]. We have got absolutely no doubt that these weapons exist. But there has been a campaign of concealment by Saddam ever since he knew that UN inspectors were coming back into the country, and I have got absolutely no doubt that those weapons are there." (04/04/04)

3 comments:

  1. Blair or Howard? Who do you choose?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think that there is much doubt on the choice between Blair or Howard, nor to me between Blair or Kennedy on Iraq or any other matter. He has made mistakes but he is head and shoulders above these two. I can't make up my mind about him though (an indication of what I think about Howard and Kennedy) I could never understand his relationship with Clinton nor Mandelson. Also the leadership promise with Brown also makes me wonder about him but somehow I still think he is decent. If there were a choice between Brown and Blair it would be Brown.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You choose neither. I could not in all consciousness vote for Blair given his role in the war in Iraq. If you believe (as I do) that this is an illegal war then Blair is a war criminal.

    ReplyDelete