Iraq war inquiry to be in private

[kalniel]

I was on the march. I knew that Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction. The government 'knew' that they did.

And- they didn't.

Heh, well I presume the government took that fact based on a method that is normally correct but in this instance wasn't (and the inquiry is precisely to determine that and reduce the chances of it happening again) - however that doesn't make me more likely to think that you are always going to know more than the government. If you think you do, why aren't you running? If you can demonstrate you always know more then I'll vote for you

And when you're done explaining that, perhaps you could explain how black is white etc. Cheers.

Nope, but I can explain how a seeing white swan proves all ravens are black

[AledJ]

Answer this then:


Do you not think those families who have lost relatives due to this illegal war deserve to know why the government took us to war on fake evidence??? Why they were so ready to follow the US???

[kalniel]

Do you not think those families who have lost relatives due to this illegal war deserve to know why the government took us to war on fake evidence??? Why they were so ready to follow the US???

I'm not sure. I suspect that when you sign up for the forces you have to have some kind of expectation that your life will be directed by those in authority, for better or for worse, without any necessity of explanation to you or your family. Maybe that should change, and it become the case that by joining the forces you earn the right for you and your family to know the reasons behind you being sent to do your job. I can't see that ever happening immediately, but maybe it should come out with the declassified materials if there isn't a strong national need to keep it secret.

[Rave]

Heh, well I presume the government took that fact based on a method that is normally correct

What, sexing up dossiers?

but in this instance wasn't (and the inquiry is precisely to determine that and reduce the chances of it happening again)

I don't see what that's got to do with it being held in private though. If mistakes were made by our elected representatives (or people in their employ), then we the voting public have a right to know so that, at the very least, we don't make the mistake of voting for them again.

- however that doesn't make me more likely to think that you are always going to know more than the government.

Well I do know more than the government about a lot of things- I've been banging on about the house price bubble and the dangers of loose credit since about 2004, for a start. Been proven entirely right on that one too.

I mean, none of it's rocket science. Clearly Iraq's offensive capability was almost completely destroyed in the first Gulf War, that's why they had no choice but to tolerate an effectively independent zone of Kurdish control over the Northern third of the country (no fly zone notwithstanding). The only money they'd had to rebuild their capabilities since then is that that they'd managed to pilfer from the oil-for-food program. The chances of them actually having any kind of functioning WMD capability under those circumstances was virtually nil. And so it proved.

I'm just an ordinary geezer who takes an interest in current affairs. I read the situation entirely right. A bunch of people who are supposedly highly trained, and presumably well paid, apparently read the situation entirely wrong- or someone 'adjusted' the evidence somewhere along the line. Either way, this is a massive, massive failure- we fought a war that was vastly expensive in terms of both money and human life on the basis of evidence that was either a) dangerously shoddy or b) a lie.

Since I, as a taxpayer, paid for the evidence to be produced and then paid for the war to be fought, I HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW what went wrong. And frankly, I think I have the right to ask for some redress.

If you think you do, why aren't you running? If you can demonstrate you always know more then I'll vote for you

I'm not standing because none of the parties come anywhere close to reflecting my worldview, and I do not believe that as an independent I have any realistic chance of doing anything other than losing my deposit.

[AledJ]

Could not have said it better myself Rave!!

[jim]

There must have been a reason in there somewhere... and I don't believe for one minute it had anything to do with WMDs.

I would imagine that the most likely scenario is that the USA had some reason to go in, whatever that might have been (most people will say oil but I have no particular opinion), and then they went around looking for allies. And in one way or another, they convinced our government to go to war.

We wouldn't have done it for nothing. I have no idea what the reasoning behind it was, but I guarantee that there was some potential benefit hidden somewhere.

[AledJ]

There must have been a reason in there somewhere... and I don't believe for one minute it had anything to do with WMDs.

I would imagine that the most likely scenario is that the USA had some reason to go in, whatever that might have been (most people will say oil but I have no particular opinion), and then they went around looking for allies. And in one way or another, they convinced our government to go to war.

We wouldn't have done it for nothing. I have no idea what the reasoning behind it was, but I guarantee that there was some potential benefit hidden somewhere.

Sadly we will not know that reasoning!!


But look at it this way good by Labour and ant little support it had left!!!!!