Gordon Brown provoked a political storm yesterday by rejecting calls for an immediate inquiry into the Iraq war and its aftermath.

 

The Prime Minister came under fire from opposition parties after he told the Commons it would not be "right" to have such an investigation until British troops return home next summer. Allies said Mr Brown does not want to consider an inquiry while a substantial number of British troops – currently 4,100 – remain in Iraq. They say he will need to revisit the issue next July, when fewer than 400 will remain to protect Iraqi oil platforms and train the Iraqi navy.

 

Ministers will come under huge pressure next summer not to use the smaller-scale presence as an excuse to further delay an inquiry. David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, promised MPs last week: "We are not going to hide behind the idea that the last troops must have come home. We have always made it clear our commitment is in respect of combat troops, and we intend to honour that commitment."

 

Opposition parties believe Mr Brown is keen to ensure the full investigation does not report until after the next general election, which must be held by June 2010. Although the controversial 2003 invasion was seen as "Tony Blair's war", Mr Brown has backed it and said he would not have acted differently.

 

David Cameron demanded a "robust, independent inquiry", saying it is vital to learn lessons which could help during the campaign in Afghanistan. With up to 400 troops remaining in Iraq, there is a chance the investigation could be delayed for "many, many years", he said.

 

The Tory leader insisted there is no need to wait until all troops are home because past inquiries had been held while conflicts continued. Troops who have served in Iraq are owed an investigation, he said. He told Mr Brown the inquiry should look into the decision to go to war, and the mistakes made in its conduct and planning. "Do you accept that if we don't learn from the mistakes of the past we are more likely to make them again in the future?" he asked.

 

The Prime Minister confirmed that British military operations in Iraq would end by 31 May at the latest, saying a rapid withdrawal would be complete by July.

On the inquiry calls, Mr Brown said: "I have always said this is a matter we will consider once our troops have come home. We are not at that position at the moment, and therefore it is not right to open the question now."

 

Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, urged Labour and the Tories to apologise for backing an "illegal war" which he described as the "single worst foreign policy decision of the past 50 years" and called for a public inquiry.

 

Charles Kennedy, who opposed the war as Liberal Democrat leader, said it was "shameful" that the US and UK did not "even bother to count" the number of innocent lives lost during the conflict and occupation. He said it would leave a "legacy of hatred" for generations. The Prime Minister replied: "I do acknowledge the sufferings of the Iraqi people. You must not forget the violence against the Iraqi people practised by Saddam Hussein. We were dealing with a dictatorship and we now have a democracy."

 

Angus Robertson, leader of the Scottish National Party at Westminster, said: "Now that there is a timetable for withdrawing our forces, there is no reason why we cannot have a timetable for an inquiry."

 

Source: The Independent on Sunday

Is Brown just delaying this till after the next election?

Yes I think he is. Probably would like to delay it indefinitely!

Yes I think he is. Probably would like to delay it indefinitely!

 

but it was blair that sent us to war, not brown, so im not sure about how much motive he would have for a delay, besides its only 6 months.

but it was blair that sent us to war, not brown, so im not sure about how much motive he would have for a delay, besides its only 6 months.

 

What difference does that make... Broon was B-Liar's right hand, so, he's just as much "on the hook" for it as B-Liar, Hoon or Campbell as far as I'm concerned.... And, isn't there going to be an election next year....? He probably assumes he's going to lose it.... :lol:

 

I think this is gonna be one of these things that'll keep getting pushed back and pushed back, using "national security" as a caveat all the time as the excuse.... I reckon about the only way you'll actually see an open and rigourous inquiry into all this is if there's a change in Govt... And even then, it'll probably stop short of recommending that the main players all get done for War Crimes, which, for me, would be about the only satisfactory conclusion of such an Inquiry in any case..... -_-

 

What difference does that make... Broon was B-Liar's right hand, so, he's just as much "on the hook" for it as B-Liar, Hoon or Campbell as far as I'm concerned.... And, isn't there going to be an election next year....? He probably assumes he's going to lose it.... :lol:

 

exactly, brown was blairs right hand man, the buck stops at the top. the question is, how involved was brown? if all he did was rubber stamp then that aint the same as organising the whole affair. his imput might only be to 'not oppose' the war.... i dunno...

exactly, brown was blairs right hand man, the buck stops at the top. the question is, how involved was brown? if all he did was rubber stamp then that aint the same as organising the whole affair.

 

Sorry man, but the whole "I was only folllowing orders" thing didn't work for ex-Nazis at Nuremburg, so it aint gonna wash with me either on this issue.... Lots of these "admin" types all rubber-stamped the Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc into the Concentration Camps, they tried to take responsibility away from themselves and to disassociate themselves from it by just saying they "followed orders", but, to me, that's no excuse, and it's no excuse here either, you're either part of the solution or part of the problem mate, there aint no sitting on the fence on this issue.... The Banality of Evil is just as bad as the real thing....

 

Broon and B-Liar might be the "diet coke of evil" in Iraq, they may be the "little Satan"; but still, pretty evil.... ;)

When Cameron comes into office in 2010 or sooner he will have to explain why he supported the illegal war too

I don't really see why there should even be an inquiry or why anyone should have to explain anything. What's done is done now. At least the world got rid of an evil dictator so the war achieved something. We can't turn the clock back and Bush would have still gone ahead even without the UK although he preferred to have our support and troops. I say good on Bush and Blair for standing up to the impotent UN who were going to do precisely nothing. I've never read anything so ridiculous as that they should face War Crime Trials. :angry: :o

Edited December 22, 200816 yr by Crazy Chris

I've never read anything so ridiculous as that they should face War Crime Trials. :angry: :o

 

Shock and Awe - the MURDER of 26,000 resdents of Baghdad in 2 nights of planned carpet bombing of residential areas by B52's

 

Severe breaches of human rights at Abu Ghirab and Camp Justice

 

Both of those 2 should in reality see Bush and B-liar sent to the GALLOWS

 

 

 

Also if you think that war had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people then you gotta be just about the thickest person on this forum mate, it was 100% about OIL, why do you think the US and Britain have stood by while Mugabe does a lot worse than Saddam Hussein was doing ? why do you think that the west did nothing about Rwanda where 2 MILLION were killed ? why do you think that nothing was done about ethnic cleansing in East Timor by Indonesian troops ? I will tell you why, because none of them have any bloody oil :rolleyes:

 

 

Shock and Awe - the MURDER of 26,000 resdents of Baghdad in 2 nights of planned carpet bombing of residential areas by B52's

 

Severe breaches of human rights at Abu Ghirab and Camp Justice

 

Both of those 2 should in reality see Bush and B-liar sent to the GALLOWS

Also if you think that war had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people then you gotta be just about the thickest person on this forum mate, it was 100% about OIL, why do you think the US and Britain have stood by while Mugabe does a lot worse than Saddam Hussein was doing ? why do you think that the west did nothing about Rwanda where 2 MILLION were killed ? why do you think that nothing was done about ethnic cleansing in East Timor by Indonesian troops ? I will tell you why, because none of them have any bloody oil :rolleyes:

 

Except no-one can PROVE it was about oil and no-one in the US or UK Governments are ever going to admit it so nothing can be done. A US President or UK PM will never be charged with War Crimes as the actual wars were sanctioned by the US Congress and British Parliament. Wasn't a sole leaders' decision as people seem to think.

Except no-one can PROVE it was about oil and no-one in the US or UK Governments are ever going to admit it so nothing can be done. A US President or UK PM will never be charged with War Crimes as the actual wars were sanctioned by the US Congress and British Parliament. Wasn't a sole leaders' decision as people seem to think.

 

They ratified it only because they were given information on WMDs that was PROVEN to be false... ie, they were LIED to..... This is the most important issue of our age, it's our "Vietnam", and these b/astards who perpetrated this lie upon us and the murders of thousands of innocents based upon that lie should be punished for their crimes, simple as, the so-called "great and the good" should be as no more immune to the rule of law than you and I, that is totally wrong.... As far as I'm concerned Bush and B-Liar are warmongers on a par with Milosevic, who similarly caused a war in the Balkans based upon lies and deceit....

Shock and Awe - the MURDER of 26,000 resdents of Baghdad in 2 nights of planned carpet bombing of residential areas by B52's

 

Severe breaches of human rights at Abu Ghirab and Camp Justice

 

Both of those 2 should in reality see Bush and B-liar sent to the GALLOWS

 

Also if you think that war had anything to do with liberating the Iraqi people then you gotta be just about the thickest person on this forum mate, it was 100% about OIL, why do you think the US and Britain have stood by while Mugabe does a lot worse than Saddam Hussein was doing ? why do you think that the west did nothing about Rwanda where 2 MILLION were killed ? why do you think that nothing was done about ethnic cleansing in East Timor by Indonesian troops ? I will tell you why, because none of them have any bloody oil :rolleyes:

 

The FULL truth..... Cant add anything more to that....

 

Personally, I'd like to see Bush and B-Liar swinging from the same Gallows that Saddam was sent to, the precedent was set with him wasn't it, let's face it, it was the result that George and his cronies wanted, so, what's sauce for the goose and all that..... :rolleyes: Hopefully, that would end up on YouTube as well.... :lol: I'm anti-Death Penalty as a rule, but, come on, there's nothing even remotely approaching "reasonable doubt" that these two evil, warmongering, lying c/unts are innocent.....

 

According to the Bush biopic W that I saw last week, Bush was fooled too, by Cheney. He was portrayed as "sexing up" the WMD info for Bush. In fact one scene has him ranting and raving at his cabinet after no WMD were found. Colin Powell was portrayed as being totally against the war but rail-roaded in to agreeing by Cheney. So maybe it wasn't all Bush yet he's getting all the flack.

Edited December 22, 200816 yr by Crazy Chris

According to the Bush biopic W that I saw last week, Bush was fooled too, by Cheney. He was portrayed as "sexing up" the WMD info for Bush. In fact one scene has him ranting and raving at his cabinet after no WMD were found. Colin Powell was portrayed as being totally against the war but rail-roaded in to agreeing by Cheney. So maybe it wasn't all Bush yet he's getting all the flack.

 

Er, that's a FILM, Chris..... :lol: The grown-ups are talking about reality here......

 

If he's really that big a fukkin' MORON, he should never have had the job to begin with..... Yeah, okay, fair enough, he's an imbecile, and it's probably more the fault of the likes of Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Bremmer, but as the PRESIDENT, the "buck" stops with him.... All that means is, we have to build a bigger Gallows..... :rolleyes:

 

I would happily see them lot swinging from the gallows

 

But I think the one that was hiding in the shadows as a sinister force was George Bush Snr

 

He never recovered from the fact he pulled the troops out before he had got Hussein and apparently it really got at him for years so I think he was there pullling the strings behind the scenes during all this too as a kind of revenge mission and carrying out unfinished business through his son

 

The guy is an ex CIA chief so his ruthlessness is not to be underestimated

 

 

I would happily see them lot swinging from the gallows

 

But I think the one that was hiding in the shadows as a sinister force was George Bush Snr

 

He never recovered from the fact he pulled the troops out before he had got Hussein and apparently it really got at him for years so I think he was there pullling the strings behind the scenes during all this too as a kind of revenge mission and carrying out unfinished business through his son

 

The guy is an ex CIA chief so his ruthlessness is not to be underestimated

 

Hmm, funny you should mention that c/unt Craig.... He was one of the architects of the Project for a New American Century, the Neo Con group who were planning this in the shadows since the mid-90s.... His old chum James Baker was also there as well....