"With the end of the Blair era arriving this week there is no shortage of
reviews of his tenure as PM. Some very interesting information is now coming out
and it confirms what others were saying years ago, though were publicly
dismissed by Blair and Bush, with those even suggesting such information
attacked and smeared. Even when given the option to opt out of military
involvement, Blair - obviously confident in Bush's ability to win in Iraq and
probably dreaming of a Churchill-like position in modern Britain - said 'no' and
insisted in being part of the military program. "
There has been a lot of talk about Blair knowing that Bush had not planned for the post invasion of Iraq. From this information comes a lot of speculation about how Blair was weak for standing with Bush on this issue. What I don't see people asking is what Blair was supposed to do about it. From reports I have read, he pushed Bush to be prepared, Bush did not take that advice, but is that the fault of Blair? I think it is easier to throw stones at those in the seats of power, than it is to understand the position they are in.
Maybe he should have kept his country out of the war. As Americans having this discussion though, that has little effect on our involvement in the war. I think that the UK had as much to gain from the overthrow of Saddam as the Americans have.
No comments:
Post a Comment