RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events "It's not about oil or Iraq..."

Since your "liberal" media does such a splendid job of "slamming" the Bush Administration and the Iraq war, it's an enigma as to why we don't see these headlines here in the U.S. Could it be because the media isn't actually liberal, nor is it very good at reporting information the public needs to know in order for them to make sound judgements about their (mis)leaders.

So we leave it to the foreign (and I suppose "communist" in your eyes) press to investigate this war beyond the White House press releases.

Quote:

---

Blair 'knew war was illegal', report suggests
By David Hughes and Michael Smith
May 04, 2005
From:
TONY Blair ignored a series of dire warnings about the risks involved in invading Iraq, according to a leaked top secret briefing note.

In his determination to support President George W. Bush's plan to topple Saddam Hussein, the Prime Minister was ready to override legal, diplomatic, military and political obstacles.

The eight-page document, revealed by Britain's Daily Mail newspaper, is stamped "Secret - UK eyes only" and is entitled Iraq: Conditions For Military Action.

It was prepared for a secret meeting of senior ministers and military and intelligence chiefs on July 23, 2002, eight months before the invasion.

The report pulls no punches about the precarious nature of military action.

Specifically, it warns:

* THERE was no legal justification for invading Iraq;

* THE aftermath of war could be disastrous yet the Americans were simply ignoring the issue;

* A MAJOR campaign was needed to 'shape' public opinion; and

* BRITAIN'S defence chiefs had doubts about the US military strategy.

The briefing note also reveals the British Government was hopelessly misreading the diplomatic signals, predicting France might join in the invasion and Russia and China would not object.

All three countries vehemently opposed the war.

The note confirms that, contrary to Mr Blair's repeated claims, he decided to go to war on April 7, 2002, almost a year before the invasion, when he visited Mr Bush at his Texas ranch.

"When the Prime Minister discussed Iraq with Mr Bush at Crawford in April, he said that the UK would support military action to bring about regime change," the note says.

Mr Blair told the President certain conditions had to be met.

They were:

* EFFORTS had to be made to build a coalition;

* THE Israel/Palestine conflict had to be "quiescent"; and

* ATTEMPTS by UN weapons inspectors to find Saddam's weapons of mass destruction had to be "exhausted".

But the document warns: "regime change per se is not a proper basis for military action under international law".

It says military action would only be lawful on grounds of self-defence, to avert a humanitarian catastrophe or if authorised by the UN Security Council.

None of these conditions were met before the invasion.

The briefing note also warns what would happen after the war.

"A post-war occupation of Iraq could lead to a protracted and costly nation-building exercise," it said.

"The US military plans are virtually silent on this point. Washington could look to us to share a disproportionate share of the burden."

On the PR front, it calls for a special Cabinet committee to be set up to plan an information campaign for the "preparation of domestic opinion".

There would also need to be "a substantial effort to secure the support of Parliament".

Two months later, the notorious Iraq dossier, with its spurious claim WMD could be deployed in 45 minutes, was issued by Downing Street.

UK military chiefs were unconvinced by the US plans.

The note says they had questioned the "extent to which the plans are proof against Iraqi counterattack using chemical or biological weapons and the robustness of US assumptions about Iraqi [un]willingness to fight".

At the July 23 meeting, these warnings were aired in discussions involving Mr Blair and senior members of his Cabinet.

---