Devastating' Secret Papers Reveal Pre-War Iraq Warnings

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3513167 ^ | 17 sept | Jon Smith, Political Editor

[Foolsgold]

Fri 17 Sep 2004 printer friendly 11:26pm (UK) 'Devastating' Secret Papers Reveal Pre-War Iraq Warnings

By Jon Smith, Political Editor, PA News

The Government came under renewed fire tonight after claims that Prime Minister Tony Blair was warned before the war in Iraq of the scale of the task that would face British and other coalition troops after Saddam Hussein was toppled.

Papers marked “Secret and Personal” detailing warnings from the Foreign Office to the premier were leaked to The Daily Telegraph.

No 10 had no immediate comment on the claims that Foreign Secretary Jack Straw had written to Mr Blair a year before the conflict saying post-war Iraq would pose major problems.

“There seems to be a larger hole in this than anything,” said Mr Straw, according to the Telegraph.

Other papers warned of the dangers of successive military coups in Iraq after Saddam was toppled and said ousting Saddam was seen as “unfinished business” from the Gulf War of 1991.

Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said: “If these documents are accurate they provide a devastating insight into the political run up to war in Iraq.

“They demonstrate that the Government agreed with the Bush administration on regime change in Iraq more than a year before military action was taken.

“The justifications offered on many occasions to Parliament and the public that the issue was one of WMD are shown to be a mechanism designed to get round the legal obstacles in international law against the removal of Saddam Hussein.

“The British Government has not come clean and been frank with the British people, either about regime change or the long term troop commitment which would result if Saddam was removed.

“It is hardly surprising that the Government has resisted any form of inquiry which would allow scrutiny of the actions of ministers or officials.

“Iraq has become a question of trust. There is ample material in these documents to show why the Government has lost so much.” s

[Foolsgold]

I heard the secret paper was typed on a 1972 typewriter

[dts32041]

Well it did take 14 months for the build up, why wouldn't a decision be made about that time?

[TheBrotherhood]

I think their thinking around 2001 or 2002 as the year in which the secret papers were typed.

[TheBrotherhood]

The decision to go to war was made at the tail end of your 14 months period. It could not have been made at the beginning.

Follow the time line.

[TheBrotherhood]

their = they're

[Hank All-American]

"The Government came under renewed fire tonight after claims that Prime Minister Tony Blair was warned before the war in Iraq of the scale of the task that would face British and other coalition troops after Saddam Hussein was toppled."

So what the critics are saying is, if you know you got a tough row to hoe, you simply mustn't undertake it. Yeah, that's the spirit. I don't exactly recall headlines like, "Roosevelt Warned Normandy Invastion Would Cost Tens of Thousands Of American Lives" or "White House Warned Iwo Jima Would Result in 7,000 U.S. Casualties."

No wonder liberals hate freedom. They don't have the stomach to defend it.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Gee, these papers say Tony was worried that things might be tough over there in Iraq!

He was trying to figure out all the things that might go wrong in order to prepare for them.

How devastating!

</sarcasm>

[onedoug]

So what?

[Cicero]

The role of a Prime Minister's advisers is to warn him of potential problems. Any moron could see that straightening out the various factions in Iraq would be a problem. Jack Straw warned Tony Blair what bumps might be in the road.

So what?

[Just mythoughts]

Liberals around the world are indeed of the same mind.

Liberals have become the voice of the terrorists!

[jwpjr]

One of the greatest elements of a successful military mission is surprise. When you have to fiddle around for over a year asking half the world for permission and describing what you plan to do it they deem it appropriate you sorta lose that element of the attack. Words cannot express the frustration I feel towards the anitwar group when they throw every throw every obstacle imaginable into the works and then refuse to take the blame when it's their actions that prevented the mission from accomplishing its goal. These people are traitors, pure and simple. There is no other word for what they did, are doing and will continue to do. There is a world of difference between protesting and committing treason. If we had been able to seal off the border with Syria and then move in very quickly to augment the work of the UN arms inspectors we would have found whatever it was that was smuggled into Syria during the several months that Kennedy, Ketty et al were doing their treason. I don't know what it was that was smuggled out, but whatever it was it's hardly fair to blame us for not finding it in Iraq after the invasion.

[SandRat]

Papers marked “Secret and Personal” detailing warnings from the Foreign Office to the premier were leaked to The Daily Telegraph.

This could get very interesting as G.B. has a little something called the Official Secrets Act and a number of individuals could be looking at some serious time in a Crown Miltary Prison.

[jim macomber]

"So what the critics are saying is, if you know you got a tough row to hoe, you simply mustn't undertake it. Yeah, that's the spirit. I don't exactly recall headlines like, "Roosevelt Warned Normandy Invastion Would Cost Tens of Thousands Of American Lives" or "White House Warned Iwo Jima Would Result in 7,000 U.S. Casualties."

No wonder liberals hate freedom. They don't have the stomach to defend it."

Bingo. Precisely. So, according to this, Blair was told it wouldn't be easy and went ahead anyway.

I remember when that was considered admirable.

[BenLurkin]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1219829/posts?page=1

[Eastbound]

^There is some_thing about ^this memo ^that seems sus_picious, but can'^t s_eem to put m_y finger on it.