Allies secretly planned for Iraq war

[emad]

London Evening Standard
29 September 2004

Britain was involved in planning for war in Iraq for at least nine months before MPs approved military action, according to a document apparently leaked from the Pentagon.

Details from the secret briefing paper suggest that military commanders took part in a war planning conference with US counterparts as early as June 2002.

At the time, Prime Minister Tony Blair was insisting that no decisions had been taken on military action.

Today's leak, on the eve of a crucial debate on Iraq at Labour's conference in Brighton, will fuel speculation that Mr Blair agreed in principle to join the US in military action at his April 2002 summit at President George Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas - something the Prime Minister has always denied.
More:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13475836?source=PA

[Ruffhowse]

1. That's it, I'm through with Blair, he needs to go!!!

[porkrind]

2. Blair is such a likeable guy

But the evidence shows he's a scumbag. I think his lying about Iraq and supporting the US against the UN is reason enough to get rid of him.

[sweetheart]

3. Tony is a liar

He lied to the british people. He lied to make a war, and he lies
now to cover his ass. He has totally dishounoured britain and
brought disrepute, and terrorism in to our homes. What an ass.

I can't trust a word he says anymore... so I've permanently tuned him
out...
"bark bark bark"...
"Yea tony, my dog says the same as well."
"bark bark bark"
"whatever tony."
"bark bark bark"
"yawn"

Bony and Tush should both be tossed out on their bums by november.

[MrPrax]

4. "leaked from the Pentagon"?

Jeez with friends like this, who needs enemies.

Tony is even stupidier than one would have ever thought...

Thinking that the extremist elements of the American GOP would do any favours for a Labour PM...

Now they will just humilate the guy until he does leave...what an idiot and even worst, the UK didn't get anything out of this, except body bags, loss of prestige, debt and political chaos.

[UpInArms]

5. is this a "well duh" moment?

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/04/06/bush.iraq/

Bush: Saddam Hussein must go

CRAWFORD, Texas (CNN) -- President Saddam Hussein's days as leader of Iraq are numbered if the United States has anything to do with it, President Bush made clear Saturday during a joint news conference with visiting Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain.

"I told the prime minister the policy of my government is to remove Saddam and that all options are on the table," he said.

Blair was more circumspect, saying Britain agrees "that Iraq would be a better place without Saddam Hussein."

"But how we proceed, that is a matter that is open," he said. "When the time comes for taking those decisions, we will tell people of those decisions."

Bush and Blair each said Hussein must prove to the world that he is not developing weapons of mass destruction.

"We both recognize the danger of a man -- who is willing to kill his own people -- harboring and developing weapons of mass destruction," Bush said. "Saddam Hussein told the world he would show us that he would not develop weapons of mass destruction, and yet, over the last decade, he has refused to do so."

...more...

[Bandit]

6. "must prove to the world that he is not developing weapons "

Saddam must prove a negative while Bush* doesn't have to prove anything. Bush* is the one making the accusation but Saddam has to do the proving. :crazy: