Blair knew US had no post-war plan for Iraq

[vortexring 0]

· PM committed troops despite chaos fears
· Bush 'offered to fight without UK'

Nicholas Watt, political editor
Sunday June 17, 2007
The Observer


Tony Blair agreed to commit British troops to battle in Iraq in the full knowledge that Washington had failed to make adequate preparations for the postwar reconstruction of the country.
In a devastating account of the chaotic preparations for the war, which comes as Blair enters his final full week in Downing Street, key No 10 aides and friends of Blair have revealed the Prime Minister repeatedly and unsuccessfully raised his concerns with the White House.


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He also agreed to commit troops to the conflict even though President George Bush had personally said Britain could help 'some other way'.
The disclosures, in a two-part Channel 4 documentary about Blair's decade in Downing Street, will raise questions about Blair's public assurances at the time of the war in 2003 that he was satisfied with the post-war planning. In one of the most significant interviews in the programme, Peter Mandelson says that the Prime Minister knew the preparations were inadequate but said he was powerless to do more.

'Obviously more attention should have been paid to what happened after, to the planning and what we would do once Saddam had been toppled,' Mandelson tells The Observer's chief political commentator, Andrew Rawnsley, who presents the documentary.

'But I remember him saying at the time: "Look, you know, I can't do everything. That's chiefly America's responsibility, not ours."' Mandelson then criticises his friend: 'Well, I'm afraid that, as we now see, wasn't good enough.'.

Opponents of the war, who have long claimed that the Pentagon planned a short, sharp offensive to overthrow Saddam Hussein with little thought of the consequences, claimed last night that the programme vindicated their criticisms. Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, told The Observer: 'These frank admissions that the Prime Minister was aware of the inadequacies of the preparations for post-conflict Iraq are a devastating indictment.'

Blair's most senior foreign affairs adviser at the time of the war makes clear that Blair was 'exercised' on the exact issue raised by the war's opponents. Sir David Manning, now Britain's ambassador to Washington, says: 'It's hard to know exactly what happened over the post-war planning. I can only say that I remember the PM raising this many months before the war began. He was very exercised about it.'

Manning reveals that Blair was so concerned that he sent him to Washington in March 2002, a full year before the invasion. Manning recalls: 'The difficulties the Prime Minister had in mind were particularly, how difficult was this operation going to be? If they did decide to intervene, what would it be like on the ground? How would you do it? What would the reaction be if you did it, what would happen on the morning after?

'All these issues needed to be thrashed out. It wasn't to say that they weren't thinking about them, but I didn't see the evidence at that stage that these things had been thoroughly rehearsed and thoroughly thought through.'

On his return to London, Manning wrote a highly-critical secret memo to Blair. 'I think there is a real risk that the [Bush] administration underestimates the difficulties,' it said. 'They may agree that failure isn't an option, but this does not mean that they will avoid it.'

Within a year Britain lost any hope of a proper reconstruction in Iraq when post-war planning was handed to the Pentagon at the beginning of 2003.

Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's envoy to the postwar administration in Baghdad, confirms that Blair was in despair. 'There were moments of throwing his hands in the air: "What can we do?" He was tearing his hair over some of the deficiencies.' The failure to prepare meant that Iraq quickly fell apart. Greenstock adds: 'I just felt it was slipping away from us really, from the beginning. There was no security force controlling the streets. There was no police force to speak of.'

The revelation that Blair was 'exercised' in private will raise questions about his public assurances. The former Labour leader, Neil Kinnock, told the programme he was given a personal assurance by Blair that he was satisfied by the preparations. 'I said to Tony, are you certain?' Kinnock told the programme. 'And when he said: "I'm sure," that was a good enough reassurance.'

Condoleezza Rice, then Bush's national security adviser, confirms that the President offered Blair a way out. Bush told Blair: 'Perhaps there's some other way that Britain can be involved.' Blair replied: 'No, I'm with you.'



I suppose it's something we've known for years - nice(?) to actually hear it 'officialised'.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

I suppose it's something we've known for years - nice(?) to actually hear it 'officialised'.

There will still be some in denial.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Krip 2]

Quote

Quote

I suppose it's something we've known for years - nice(?) to actually hear it 'officialised'.

There will still be some in denial.

There always will be, about anything that involves people old enough to think and express themselves.

The good news "they" haven't taken most of us away that won't buy their BS yet.

John, JOHN! JOHN!!! you still there

Don't look up.

[vortexring 0]

Of course - I wonder if he'd had some insight into how Iraq would turn out post war, would he have done things differently? Jaques Chiraic insisted there would be a civil war back in 2002 - whilst Blairs reply, to somebody else as he left the room; "He just doesn't get, does he?" (Chiraic) Oh dear. And look at all the hatred that was poured on France for failing to side with America.

It was said recently how Britian, 'not siding with the US would have seismic. It would have entailed a complete reversal of British foreign policy and a dash to become more deeply enmeshed in the EU.'
So what!? 'The Bush Administration were sympathetic to the political pressure that Blair was under; they assured him that there would be no animosity should Blair decide not to participate.'

I wonder what Gordon Browns Iraq policy will be. As for Blair, here's part of a Kipling poem, somebody quoted for him regarding how he'll be remembered:

'And the end of the fight is a tombstone white
With the name of the late deceased.
And the epitaph drear "A fool lies here
Who tried to hustle the east".

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[Krip 2]

Hi Vtr

How many military guy's have you lost in iraq so far

[vortexring 0]

As of the 16th June, 151.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[chris74 0]

Yo Vortex,
No more treachery from the french ? Did you change your mind now ? Next time think by yourself . When you mix politic + business + war = Irak = Vietnam . Same story , probably the same end . I really feel sick for the 151 .
Blue skies
Chris

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

I suppose it's something we've known for years - nice(?) to actually hear it 'officialised'.

There will still be some in denial.

Come on now John....you mean telling the world "We are America and we will prevail over evil" isn't a good enough exit strategy?

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....