Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

John Major leads calls for inquiry into Iraq conflict

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
T_i_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 03:43 AM
Original message
John Major leads calls for inquiry into Iraq conflict
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article207934...

Sir John Major led calls for an independent inquiry into Tony Blair's decision to go to war in Iraq after the revelations by a former British senior diplomat that contradict the Prime Minister's case for the conflict. The former Conservative prime minister said the inquiry was needed into the "new information" reported yesterday in The Independent from the secret report to the Butler inquiry by Carne Ross, a key negotiator for Britain at the UN.

"The more we learn about the beginning of the war, the more uncertain its rationale seems to be," Sir John said. He said there was "no doubt" that the new Democrat-dominated US Congress would hold an inquiry into the war.

"I do think it is important in due course we do precisely the same," he added. "I would like an independent inquiry that would examine all the information dispassionately."

The Prime Minister's official spokesman rejected the calls, saying there had already been four inquiries. But Labour MPs joined the demands last night, urging Gordon Brown to call an inquiry when he takes over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 04:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. So where was John Major before the war?
Edited on Sat Dec-16-06 04:57 AM by DoYouEverWonder
probably drumming up support for the invasion for his friends at Carlyle Group.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. He supported the invasion, but called for an inquiry in July 2003
Making his inquiry call, Mr Major said he had supported the war, partly because he knew Iraq had possessed weapons of mass destruction in the early 1990s.

Like many others, he had accepted the government's warnings but said "quite a few" of those alerts were now being questioned.

"It has to be cleared up because it is in the government's interest to clear it up," said Mr Major.
...
"It is essential that the word of government and the intelligence services is readily accepted by Parliament and the public."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3054549.stm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kipper58 Donating Member (208 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Well, he certainly knew SOMETHING about Iraq!
The gall of this man is almost beyond belief! John Major was up to his neck in the Matrix Churchill affair, otherwise known here in Britain as the "arms to Iraq scandal". For a full understanding of the extent of the Conservative Party's hypocrisy over the question of whether Saddam had WMD, look at this Wikipedia entry about their collusion with a company that was actively breaking sanctions against selling weapons to Iraq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms-to-Iraq

There's been a complete display of amnesia about this in the British media whenever Conservative spokesmen spout off about how we went to war on a lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Slick, isn't he?
He encourages the invasion, gets all the perks that went along with it for investments, then as the wind shifts and he has already gotten what he wanted, begins to lead the charge against the PM who went along with the war--just in time to make political hay for his party. If he plays it right, his party sweeps back in, and they do the same things Blair did, but claim it is all an attempt to clean up the mess Blair created. Like our own buttinsky former leaders are doing. BushDaddy and Baker are blaming W for making mistakes, yet suggesting a plan of action which somehow does exactly what W wants to do anyway--send more troops and money, and stay the course.

Wasn't there a Who song about that?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 06:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. Saw John Major speak once a couple of years ago
seemed to be very sharp and well informed. This could be interesting........ :popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoFerret Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
5. "Britain never thought Saddam as threat - diplomat"
Edited on Sat Dec-16-06 07:49 AM by JoFerret
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1973311,00.html

The British government never believed Saddam Hussein posed a threat to British interests and warned the US that toppling him would lead to "chaos", according to a Foreign Office diplomat closely involved in negotiations in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.

Damning repudiation of the government's public claims in the run-up to the war is contained in secret evidence to Lord Butler's committee on the abuse of intelligence over Iraq by Carne Ross, a diplomat at Britain's UN mission in New York.

His evidence, in which he says the government privately assessed that Iraq possessed no significant quantity of weapons of mass destruction, has been published on the Commons foreign affairs committee website. Mr Ross gave evidence to the group last month but some MPs had been reluctant to have it published.

...

"At no time did assess that Iraq's WMD (or any other capability) posed a threat to the UK," he told the Butler committee. "On the contrary, it was the commonly-held view among the officials dealing with Iraq that any threat had been effectively contained ... At the same time, we would frequently argue, when the US raised the subject, that 'regime change' was inadvisable, primarily on the grounds that Iraq would collapse into chaos."
<more>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 19th 2017, 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC