AS we wait for the publication of the Chilcott Inquiry into our involvement in the illegal invasion of Iraq it would appear that events in the United States have provided the evidence that George W Bush and Tony Blair made statements to justify the invasion knowing they were false.
The CIA finally declassified much of its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq, which was the chief document used by the Bush administration to justify the US attack. According to the estimate, the US intelligence community concluded that "we are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed" and "the information we have on Iraqi nuclear personnel does not appear consistent with a coherent effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program". With regard to the aluminium tubes which Condoleeza Rice claimed were for the Iraqi nuclear programme, according to the NIE, the Energy Department had already concluded that the tubes were "consistent with applications to rocket motors" and "this is the more likely end use".
But even as the US intelligence community had reached this conclusion, President Bush told the American people that Iraq "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons" and "the evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program". Tony Blair meanwhile was telling Parliament that Iraq could strike us within 45 minutes which was also shown to be false.
We know that Mr Blair and Mr Bush communicated frequently and it is outwith the bounds of credulity that Mr Bush did not share this information with his partner in war. It is no wonder that Mr Blair fought tooth and nail to prevent communication between the two being made public. Chilcott will be a whitewash but the evidence is now available to show that statements were made to justify the war which were known to be false.
David Stubley,
22 Templeton Crescent,
Prestwick.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article