Blair says he would have invaded Iraq, even if he knew there were no WMD

[LeftishBrit]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/12/tony-blair-iraq-chilcot-inquiry

Our very own terrorist fanatic.

[tblue]

1. So then, it was about oil after all.

Fine. Then grab a gun and ship out, Tony, I mean Sir Poodle.

The clown.

[CJCRANE]

2. He was following the PNAC plan:

"Also the fact of how that region was going to change and how in the end it was going to evolve as a region and whilst he was there, I thought and actually still think, it would have been very difficult to have changed it in the right way."

The trouble is the neocons' rhetoric was all talk, they had no interest in democracy, preferring kidnap, torture and endless war profiteering instead.

Never trust a neocon (even if you're a neolib).

[B Calm]

3. No shit. . . Even if he did believe the damn lies, it should have been

obvious two days into the war that they didn't have any WMD's. Using Common Sense would have told him that! What's the purpose of having WMD's if you're not going to use them against an invading army.

[n2doc]

4. And yet, even with that, he didn't plan for the aftermath

So he wanted regime change? He was certain they were going to war no matter what the facts? Why the hell didn't he plan for what happened next? He needs to be tried and hanged, just like the Nazi's at Nuremburg.

[GeorgeGist]

5. Tony is a loser ...

even now.

[TheCowsCameHome]

6. Oh dear, the little poodle has turned into a vicious thing.

Bad dog.

[H2O Man]

7. Indeed, he did. n/t

[spanone]

8. arrogant fuck

[HughMoran]

9. What an idiot

Bush-Blair - two peas in a pod :eyes:

[mmonk]

10. Because he knew there were none.

[Terra Alta]

11. Tony needs to shut up!

and join Bush who is probably getting drunk off his ass down in Crawford. The two are irrelevant now; no one cares what they have to say.