Blair denies 'covert' deal with Bush to invade Iraq

I think there was a deal that Blair and Bush struck at the ranch. It was maybe oil that led them to reach this deal. Tony Blair is live on the BBC today for the Iraq inquiry. He has been giving his evidence.

What he said today was that sometimes it is better to ask the 2010 question rather than a 2003 question. He was maybe playing to the public. He said, had the action not been taken in 2003, then maybe WMD would have destroyed the earth.

So if Britan is there on US's side then I believe the US can get away with anything. Who needs the UN?

Tony Blair has denied striking a "covert" deal with George Bush to invade Iraq at a private meeting in 2002 at the US president's ranch.

He told the Iraq inquiry there was no secret about what was said - that Saddam Hussein had to be dealt with and "the method of doing that is open".

"It's a decision. And the decision I had to take was, given Saddam's history, given his use of chemical weapons, given the over one million people whose deaths he had caused, given 10 years of breaking UN resolutions, could we take the risk of this man reconstituting his weapons programmes or is that a risk that it would be irresponsible to take?"

Source: news.bbc.co.uk...

reply to post by sunny_2008ny


Or that Blair thought his involvement would temper Bush's clearly more-highly-strung approach to blowing the crap out of everything as quickly as possible. Bush's attempts to get support for an invasion of Iraq immediately after 9/11 is a testament to that.

There are lots of possible explanations - we just need some evidence before we can start to believe any of them, but it seems you've foregone the evidence and leapt straight into believing. Interesting.

reply to post by davesidious

There are lots of possible explanations - we just need some evidence before we can start to believe any of them, but it seems you've foregone the evidence and leapt straight into believing. Interesting.

Well what exactly would you call as evidence? Because the real evidence never gets out to us. And I am sure Blair must be saying what he wants to say and not give the real evidence

But yes there are many explanations to this so maybe we must wait and see if anything else comes up

reply to post by sunny_2008ny


I'm talking about official documentation. Even if it doesn't "get to us", that doesn't mean we can start to make stuff up or believe anything. We have to keep rational, or not bother at all.

As you say, the only possible course of action at the moment is to wait for evidence. Those with it, if it exists, can't keep it secret forever. Either by accident, skullduggery, or time, it will be released one day.