Back to Iraq: the theme of TP - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Simple_Min · 05-20-2003, 09:46 AM

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/pol...p?story=406341

Quote:

So, Mr Straw, why did we go to war?
* Jack Straw, 21 February 2003: 'Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them'
* Jack Straw, 14 May 2003: Asked of the need to find weapons of mass destruction... 'It's not crucial'

By Ben Russell, Political Correspondent
15 May 2003

The legal and political basis for the war in Iraq was thrown into doubt yesterday when Jack Straw declared that uncovering Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction was "not crucially important".

The Foreign Secretary's comments added to the confusion over the capacity of the former Iraqi leader to unleash chemical or biological weapons, which in the weeks before the Allied invasion had been declared an imminent threat to Britain and the West.

Mr Straw was accused of rewriting history after he appeared to undermine the Government's confident claim that Saddam held up to 10,000 litres of anthrax, declaring: "Ten thousand litres is one third of one petrol tanker. Whether or not we are able to find one third of one petrol tanker in a country twice the size of France remains to be seen."

Asked about Iraq's arsenal on BBC Radio 4, he said only: "I hope there will be further evidence of literal finds." Significantly, Mr Straw used the past tense to describe Iraq's arsenal, saying: "It certainly did exist. There is no question about that, and the Blix report suggested that it still existed."

Challenged on the importance of a fresh weapons find, he said: "It's not crucially important for this reason ... The evidence in respect of Iraq was so strong that the Security Council on the 8th of November said unanimously that Iraq's proliferation and possession of the weapons of mass destruction and unlawful missile systems, as well as its defiance of the United Nations, pose – and I quote – 'a threat to international peace and security'."

Peter Kilfoyle, a former defence minister, said: "Jack Straw is trying to reinvent history. All these claims about WMD are built on sand. If they do not find these weapons, it takes away the only conceivable justification for conducting this war.

"It shows the real reasons for this war: the superpower flexing its muscles and looking after resources, in this case petroleum."

Geoff Hoon, the Secretary of State for Defence, insisted yesterday that the existence of weapons of mass destruction was "the sole justification" for war and confidently predicted that such weapons would eventually be found, pointing to finds of biological protection suits and a vehicle thought to be a mobile biological weapons laboratory.

But Mr Straw's comments were the latest in a series of shifting statements from cabinet ministers about the whereabouts of Saddam's weaponry, the alleged threat from which provided the legal and political justification for the war.

They were in sharp contrast to the Foreign Secretary's speech to the Royal Institute of International Affairs in February when he declared that some of Saddam's chemical or biological weapons could be deployed "within 45 minutes".

Since then the Foreign Office has, slowly and subtly, changed its rhetoric. While Mr Blair and Mr Hoon continue to exude confidence about the prospects of finding a "smoking gun" in Iraq, Mr Straw has quietly raised the prospect of a different scenario.

He first raised doubts over Iraq's weapons of mass destruction last month when he told MPs not that weapons existed now and would be found, but that "Iraq had illegal possessions of mass destruction and had them recently".

MPs and watching journalists were left with the impression, unchallenged by senior Foreign Office officials, that Britain was no longer completely confident that the elusive weapons would ever be found.

The Foreign Office has stressed that war was amply justified by Iraq's failure to account for weapons holdings dating from after the 1991 Gulf War, detailed in reports by the UN chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix.

Ministers, including Ruth Kelly, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, and the Foreign Office minister Mike O'Brien, have used the analogy of the conflict in Northern Ireland to justify the change, arguing that years of searching have failed to uncover the IRA's weapons dumps.

On Tuesday, John Reid, the Leader of the Commons, said he was not surprised that Iraqi weapons had not yet been found.

Mr Straw argued yesterday that the discovery of mass graves at the site of ancient Babylon provided a moral justification for the war.

"You see these pictures in newspapers about the discovery of 15,000 or so mass graves," he said. "Anybody who had any doubt about the rightness of our actions should just draw to their own attention the venality of the Saddam regime, which thankfully has now been removed."

But the Foreign Secretary's comments raised deep concerns in the ranks of Labour MPs already unhappy with the decision to take Britain to war. Doug Henderson, a former armed services minister, and a leading opponent of the war, said: "I think it's pretty essential if any legitimacy is to be maintained that the reason for embarking on this process is proven. If it's not, people will ask what are the motives for war."

Liquor Dealer · 05-20-2003, 10:46 AM

"So, Mr Straw, why did we go to war?
* Jack Straw, 21 February 2003: 'Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them'
* Jack Straw, 14 May 2003: Asked of the need to find weapons of mass destruction... 'It's not crucial' "

I see no reason to disagree with either statement -

Statement #1 - the weapons are deployable within 45 minutes ... they may still be! We just haven't found them (yet). I do not think any sane person can look at the history of Saddam Hussein and say he did not both have and use weapons of mass destruction. He did not use them once - with the success he had, and then suddenly decide he'd been a bad boy and would play fair in the future.

Statement #2 - I do not think any sane person can look at Iraq today and say what was done was not justifiable. The end justified the means. Our planning post mortem was a little lacking - hopefully that will remedy itself in a short time. I find myself agreeing with the soldier on the news this morning when he said he didn't really mind helping the Iraqis clean up the trash - but believed that they should help a little too. It's hard to really help someone who isn't willing to help themselves. (And by help themselves I don't mean helping themselvesf to everything that wasn't glued down).

darkmagex · 05-20-2003, 05:09 PM

LD: well, im pretty sure that since we could read the tag on your underwear from space we should be able to see any easily deployable WMD fairly quickly

Dilbert1234567 · 05-23-2003, 03:07 PM

if sadam had WMD, and knew he was going to loose, why did he not go out with a bang?

seretogis · 05-23-2003, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dilbert1234567
if sadam had WMD, and knew he was going to loose, why did he not go out with a bang?

Saddam cannot win a military battle with the US, and he knows it. However, if he can make the US look like oil-hungry imperialists then he can win a media-war. At the end of the Gulf War he declared himself the victor, and many in the region believed it. He's doing the same thing here.

As for the above statements, I don't see a problem with either of them. The WMDs were there, even as reported by the UN, and that alone was justification to go into Iraq. Whether or not we find them now (in Iraq or in France

), it won't make the war unjustified.

The_Dude · 05-23-2003, 05:53 PM

the lies that led up to war.

bush presented it like it was an "iminent threat" to the safetey of the US.

seretogis · 05-23-2003, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The_Dude
the lies that led up to war.

bush presented it like it was an "iminent threat" to the safetey of the US.

Bush doesn't control the UN and their findings, nor their unanimous vote that Iraq is a threat. He may have a nice package, but his endowment doesn't grant him that much power.

05-20-2003, 10:46 AM	#2 (permalink)
Liquor Dealer Super Agitator Location: Just SW of Nowhere!!! In the good old US of A	"So, Mr Straw, why did we go to war? * Jack Straw, 21 February 2003: 'Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them' * Jack Straw, 14 May 2003: Asked of the need to find weapons of mass destruction... 'It's not crucial' " I see no reason to disagree with either statement - Statement #1 - the weapons are deployable within 45 minutes ... they may still be! We just haven't found them (yet). I do not think any sane person can look at the history of Saddam Hussein and say he did not both have and use weapons of mass destruction. He did not use them once - with the success he had, and then suddenly decide he'd been a bad boy and would play fair in the future. Statement #2 - I do not think any sane person can look at Iraq today and say what was done was not justifiable. The end justified the means. Our planning post mortem was a little lacking - hopefully that will remedy itself in a short time. I find myself agreeing with the soldier on the news this morning when he said he didn't really mind helping the Iraqis clean up the trash - but believed that they should help a little too. It's hard to really help someone who isn't willing to help themselves. (And by help themselves I don't mean helping themselvesf to everything that wasn't glued down). __________________ Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

05-23-2003, 03:07 PM	#4 (permalink)
Dilbert1234567 Devils Cabana Boy Location: Central Coast CA	if sadam had WMD, and knew he was going to loose, why did he not go out with a bang? __________________ Donate Blood! "Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

05-23-2003, 05:53 PM	#6 (permalink)
The_Dude The GrandDaddy of them all! Location: Austin, TX	the lies that led up to war. bush presented it like it was an "iminent threat" to the safetey of the US. __________________ "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

05-20-2003, 05:09 PM	#3 (permalink)
darkmagex Loser Location: Rochester, NY	LD: well, im pretty sure that since we could read the tag on your underwear from space we should be able to see any easily deployable WMD fairly quickly