Your analysis of the WMD situation in Iraq and PM Blair's (and Pres Bush's) disclosure does not resemble the Conservative view in the US. It resembles the left. For starters, the accusation is of deliberate misleading, lying, not a case of error.
Having read the last two UN reports prior to the war, I do not feel complacent that there was no WMD threat from Iraq and that we were mistaken, let alone lied to. The absence of stockpiles does not make me secure that no threat existed.
Further digressing for a minute here, when it came to Iraq and the dearth of humint and intel from within, and there was practically none, how many sources could one realistically count on to document the 45 minute claim?
The Conservative Party did the right thing in supporting PM Blair in going to war. It is unfortunate that they could not restrain themselves from making political capital of his troubles from the left on WMD "lies," and being the US's "poodle." As I said before, the alliance of the Conservatives and Left over "Blair lied," resembles the Buchanan faction in the US.
<< Your analysis of the WMD situation in Iraq and PM Blair's (and Pres Bush's) disclosure does not resemble the Conservative view in the US. It resembles the left. >>
Hardly surprising, surely?
Given, that is, its employment in the "debate" [Read: dissemination and promulgation of dissent-provoking propaganda] by an element of the vanguard of the anti-American brigade of lumpen Limey leftist agitators who pose here as 'british "FReepers?"'
And who, as it was quidnunc's misfortune to point out, serve no purpose here -- their occasional apparent pandering to by pathetic "popularity-contest" of their own volition notwithstanding -- than to agitate and to incite and encourage envy-motivated, hatred-engined and rage-driven Euro-peon-styled dissent.
<< For starters, the accusation is of deliberate misleading, lying, not a case of error. >>
Again not surprising given that there is little to no truth to be had FRom any of the pretty-much pathologically-hesperophobic british bilge and other anti-Americanism they promulgate nor among their mob-ruled attacks upon any who -- as did quidnunc -- recognise their ratbaggery and dare to conFRont it and give it the lie!
<< [On their] 'UK "freeper"' locale ...
The scalawags boast of their dirty deeds! >>
And on and off our boards and under our very noses they and their ilk have successfully done so for at least the fourteen or fifteen years elsewhere and here at FR that I have participated in this kind of forum.
During all of that time and to date I have observed, on-and-off this forum and pre-dating it, as that parasitical pack of "scaliwags;" all the while "off-boards" incited and manipulated; be used and abused [Often, "virtually-sexually"] -- and when no longer of use be Cli'ton-esquely cast aside by its Cli'ton-cloned air-and-bandwidth-thieving leftist-agitator-posing as "conservative"-drivers, whose number, like their intellect, their manners, their tactic -- and their ability to con an American "following," remains small and small-minded -- but remains a constant!
I only told you about the criticisms that have been made of Blair's Iraq WMD dossier which was published in 2002. Its not my fault if you want to disregard them and shoot the messenger.
Having read the last two UN reports prior to the war, I do not feel complacent that there was no WMD threat from Iraq and that we were mistaken, let alone lied to. The absence of stockpiles does not make me secure that no threat existed.
I agree that it was reasonable to assume that Saddam's non-compliance with UN resolutions regarding the surrender of WMD, meant that he was probably pursuing a WMD development program. As I said before, I was for the war.
Further digressing for a minute here, when it came to Iraq and the dearth of humint and intel from within, and there was practically none, how many sources could one realistically count on to document the 45 minute claim?
But the criticism was that the government failed to add a caveat to the dossier saying that the claim had not been verified. I agree that getting verification may have been impossible, but they could have admitted that.
It is unfortunate that they could not restrain themselves from making political capital of his troubles from the left on WMD "lies,"
Welcome to the real world, politicians in opposition always do this sort of thing.
and being the US's "poodle."
I don't agree that they did that. That approach was used by the Liberal Democrats, Respect etc.
As I said before, the alliance of the Conservatives and Left over "Blair lied," resembles the Buchanan faction in the US.
It was not an alliance, it was political opportunism which failed to resonate with the British electorate due to the Conservative party's known pro-war stance. However, there was no betrayal of the USA or anti-American sentiment there, which was your original accusation against the Conservatives. If Howard had won the election then he would not have withdrawn British forces from Iraq.