The Chilcot Report

krish

It's known he had WMDs earlier and used them, but as they were US allies against Iran, there was no problem
- but no stockpiles were left and likely no production capability by 2003, despite the constant stream of BS from Bush and Blair about mobile weapons labs having just been found

Cliff

Just back on public opinion at the time, I remember how the French were lambasted for not joining us in the war.  They really upset Jack Straw trying to get a new UN resolution. They were accused of sabotage!

SteakAndCake

Yes and America renamed French Fries to Freedom Fries.  The mainstream media were actively looking for a war.  The way they treated Charles Kennedy and Robin Cook was revolting.   The whole country was up for a fight and I remember thinking the whole thing made no sense.

krish

cheese-eating surrender monkeys was the term coined for them back then wasn't it?

EDIT ... apparently not, nicked from The Simpsons
Cheese-eating surrender monkeys - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sonic67

Tony Blair 'not straight' with UK over Iraq, says Chilcot - Tony Blair 'not straight' with UK over Iraq, says Chilcot - BBC News

Tony Blair was not "straight with the nation" about his decisions in the run up to the Iraq War, the chairman of the inquiry into the war has told the BBC.

SteakAndCake

"Emotionally Truthful" = Saying things you want to be true rather than are true.  "Not straight" is as close to calling Blair a liar without actually doing it.  Blair is a proven liar and his lies destabilised a Middle East country and led to many unnecessary deaths.  All this skirting around and deflection makes me quite angry.

Enki

Getting rid of him was not a problem to me, don’t actually care if Blair lied in invoking a military response Saddam Hussain did not deserve truth, it’s what came after, expecting a nation that has not known anything but tyrannical rule, to get democracy in a several years, just idiotic Western arrogance.

SteakAndCake

You don't remove a dictator unless the situation afterwards leaves the people in a better situation.  A functioning society under a dictator is preferable to a society than can vote but has no mains water, electricity, sewers, or functioning public services.  

Many of these countries have dictators because anything less is not strong enough to hold the country together in the face of religious and tribal allegiances.

You either wait for the country to evolve to a point where change comes from within or you invade, topple the dictator, and impose a quasi empire where you assume full control of the country and ensure continuity of government.  

Ignoring that, you never mislead a country to support a war based on lies.  Iraq was never a threat to the UK.  The people and MPs that supported the war did so because they thought they were supporting the best interests of the UK.   People died for a lie.  That sacrifice was in no way worth toppling one dictator.

Enki

UK milatray personal died getting rid of an tyrannical dictatorship, its a just cause and I'm perfectly happy with Saddam Hussein and his Baath party being put to the sword, so to speak.  Very happy paying my tax for that one. However, again I will reiterate, it's the years after, the lack of support and time the people and state of Iraq were given to construct their country thats the real mislead, If Iraq was achieving much more positive outcomes this would not even be an issue.