Liberal Burblings

Archive for the ‘Iraq’ Category

The spin is that David Miliband was against the Iraq war so we should all be cheering in the streets now that he has been appointed Foreign Secretary.

Today’s Guardian puts it this way:

(Miliband) is not publicly associated with the decision to invade Iraq and is said to have been privately sceptical about it.

Oh really? At the time, he may have been safely in a “home” department, approving massive expenditure on civil servants to write his “blog”. But his public parliamentary voting record shows that he has been up to his neck in support for the war and in rejecting an investigation.

There is an excellent website called Public Whip. If you put an MP’s name and a subject into its search engine, it will tell, quite scientifically, what that MP’s record has been on the issue.

For example, a search for David Miliband MP and the Iraq war comes up with the interesting observation that, based on his parliamentary record, D. Miliband was 0.8% against the invasion. Not a lot against the invasion, in other words. The 0.8% is due to him being absent from one vote:

David Miliband MP, South Shields agrees 0.8% (explain…) with the policy, Iraq 2003 – Against the invasion.

On the subject of whether a Iraq investigation is necessary, D.Miliband is only 6.3% in agreement. The 6.3% is due to him being absent from five votes on the issue:

David Miliband MP, South Shields agrees 6.3% (explain…) with the policy, Iraq Investigation – Necessary.

Former British Ambassador to the US, Christopher Meyer has said that Tony Blair feared that the USA would “nuke the s**t” out of Afghanistan in revenge for 9-11.

In Channel Four’s two part documentary, “The Rise and Fall of Tony Blair”, Meyer says:

Blair’s real concern was that there would be quote unquote ‘a kneejerk reaction’ by the Americans… they would go thundering off and nuke the s**t out of the place without thinking straight.

The Mirror reports:

In Channel 4′s candid two-part documentary The Rise and Fall of Tony Blair, Mr Meyer claims the threat explains why the Prime Minister vowed to stand “shoulder-to-shoulder” with Bush over the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan – to thwart his allguns blazing battle plan.

But it meant sending British troops to Iraq knowing Washington had NOT made preparations for its post-war reconstruction.

From the other side of the pond, Daily Kos comments in outspoken terms:

The next time a world leader feels like legitimizing some reckless endeavor because they think they can keep control of Americans better by working on the inside, I have a request: don’t do us any bloody favors. And Tony, if you wanted to stop this war, the way to do it was to speak out against it, not pal up with the instigator. W***er.

(My asterisks)

The Observer reveals quotes from senior Blair aides at the time, from a forthcoming Channel 4 programme, which show that Blair repeatedly warned Bush of the need to prepare for the post-Iraq invasion scenario. Blair knew full well there was no adequate plan. The picture painted is of Blair as powerless to persuade the US to properly prepare for the aftermath.

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, told The Observer: ‘These frank admissions that the Prime Minister was aware of the inadequacies of the preparations for post-conflict Iraq are a devastating indictment.’

(What the article doesn’t mention is something Paddy Ashdown said the other day. That is that an expert on the World War Two aftermath in Germany visited the White House well before the invasion and told them not to do all the things they did do – chief among them: disbanding the army.)

The article also repeats that Bush was quite happy for Britain not to send troops:

Condoleezza Rice, then Bush’s national security adviser, confirms that the President offered Blair a way out. Bush told Blair: ‘Perhaps there’s some other way that Britain can be involved.’ Blair replied: ‘No, I’m with you.’

So, Blair could have quietly helped without sending troops and Bush would have been perfectly happy. It just shows how foolish Blair was on the whole issue.

When the US Democrats took control of congress, I looked forward to a few interesting congressional hearings about the war on Iraq. I didn’t want flippant entertainment, I passionately believe that Bush and Blair should be tried for war crimes in The Hague. Congressional hearings are a good start in this direction.

My expectations have been exceeded from the start. The Democrats have brilliantly decided to begin with US Army “spin stories”. Two of the main ones were:

1. Pat Tillman, American football star, died heroically fighting the enemy.

2. Jessica Lynch “had been wounded by Iraqi gunfire but kept fighting until her ammunition ran out.”

It turned out, of course, that Tillman was killed by friendly fire and Lynch’s gun had jammed without her firing a shot.

The chickens have come home to roost. Pat Tillman’s brother has testified that the US Army’s spinning was “horrific”. Jessica Lynch has called the army’s story about her “not true”.

When the US Democrats took control of congress, I looked forward to a few interesting congressional hearings about the war on Iraq. I didn’t want flippant entertainment, I passionately believe that Bush and Blair should be tried for war crimes in The Hague. Congressional hearings are a good start in this direction.

My expectations have been exceeded from the start. The Democrats have brilliantly decided to begin with US Army “spin stories”. Two of the main ones were:

1. Pat Tillman, American football star, died heroically fighting the enemy.

2. Jessica Lynch “had been wounded by Iraqi gunfire but kept fighting until her ammunition ran out.”

It turned out, of course, that Tillman was killed by friendly fire and Lynch’s gun had jammed without her firing a shot.

The chickens have come home to roost. Pat Tillman’s brother has testified that the US Army’s spinning was “horrific”. Jessica Lynch has called the army’s story about her “not true”.

I am very grateful to the Norfolk Blogger for highlighting the US plan to bomb Iran.

I really do hope and pray that:

(a) George Bush runs out of time in office before he gets anywhere near to bombing Iran.
(b) The new Democrat majority in Congress stops this nonsense.
(c) President Ahmadinejad continues to be pressured by moderates to draw back from confrontation.

The chilling line in the BBC report is this:

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the trigger for such an attack reportedly includes any confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon – which it denies.

Crikey. Déjà vu, or what? We seemed to have “confirmation” that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons. But, to use the US vernacular, that “confirmation” turned out to be worth little more than a “bowl of warm spit”.