Regular readers will know that I was rather anti-war. Now it seems that after nearly 2 months on the ground in Iraq the best evidence found so far of the Weapons Of Mass Destruction that formed the basis of going to war are two trucks that DON'T CONTAIN ANY ILLEGAL WEAPONS OR EQUIPMENT and Donald Rumsfeld is now suggesting that Saddam Hussein's Weapons of Mass Destruction MAY NEVER BE FOUND or that the Iraqi's might have actually destroyed them prior to the conflict in TOTAL COMPLIANCE with the UN's demands for disarmament.
It also appears that Intelligence reports on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction were made 'more sexy' by using unconfirmed reports that they could be used at 45 minutes notice, in order to put pressure on the media and MPs that Iraq posed the immediate and clear threat that justified the war.
My conclusion? Tony Blair is a liar and a fink, and the war in Iraq is becoming increasingly indefensible, by the very terms used to justify it in the first place. It's surely also no coincidence that one of the very first reconstruction contracts handed out - to run Umm Qasar seaport - was given to Bechtel, whose ex-CEO was one Dick Cheney, the Vice President. It's surely also no coincidence that of the 1000+ companies invited to tender for the other reconstruction contracts, less than 100 of them are not American or British. Jobs for the boys? Too fucking right.
Every single pro-war person I spoke to before the conflict categorically stated that this war wasn't about oil. It was about WMDs. I ask you Hawks now - where the fuck are they? Why has the UN been sidelined, the sanctions lifted, and the Oil for Food program (run by the UN) been disbanded, to be replaced by a reconstruction trust fund that depends solely on oil revenues, which is administrated by the US and UK, not the UN? Why are the administrators for Iraq now talking about part privatising the oil industry to Western Oil Companies such as Shell, BP and Exxon, because the oil revenues alone will not fund the reconstruction of Iraq's infrastructure (blown to pieces by the US and the UK in two wars and 12 years of sanctions) AND pay off Iraq's $110 billion debt that Saddam Hussein's creditors (including the US, UK and even France, I hasten to add) are clamouring to claim back from the new regime.
And now with Blair and Rumfeld making threatening noises at Iran how long can we allow our governments to get away with such illegal and irresponsible activity? How can we believe their justifications to intervene in our countries affairs and provoke "regime change" when the humanitarian and human rights disasters of Afghanistan and Iraq are the results?