Tuesday, August 17, 2004
Perspective
This Opinion Journal article by James Taranto of Thursday, March 6, 2003, reminds us of how carefully Bush laid out the reasons for war with Iraq, unlike Blair, who stuck like glue to WMD. This will certainly reduce the Labour Party's majority at the next election.
Tuesday 31 August 2004
The Dyke book reported in BBC News, 29 August runs through the British side and has several links for revision puposes.
My view is simple. Blair did lie, but he had to have a reason for going to war alongside the US so that the UK was not left out of the considerable spoils of war, specifically military. In reptrospect, his reasons look even more paltry and ridiculous. At the time he persuaded himself (not us) by repeating the mantra of WMD and the obviously stupid 40 minutes claim which he took no pains to check.
Another argument has been aired in the last few days on the cyberwaves, that Blair fell in line with the U.S. in order to keep Bush in line. This is an inept assessment. Politically Blair stood no chance, at the time the neo-cons were in the ascendency, of curbing the action plan for Iraq.
Homework
The Military Dimension of Science and Technology
- UK arms exports worth approx. £5 billion per year
A cloud over civilisation
- Corporate power is the driving force behind US foreign policy - and the slaughter in Iraq - J K Galbraith, Thursday 15 July, 2004
Global Issues. org
- How Weapons makers are Shaping U.S. Foreign and Military Policies
¶ Tuesday, August 17, 2004
