Monday, July 11, 2016

Imperial Hubris

Jeez, that Imperial Hubris is a potent brew:

"... one of the documents released with the [Chilcot] report, a letter from Blair to Bush on December 4, 2001, does contain a hint that things could have been even more disastrous. After suggesting military actions to take place in Iraq, the Philippines, Somalia, Yemen, and Indonesia, Blair turns to Syria and Iran. His advice here begins: 'If toppling Saddam is a prime objective, it is far easier to do it with Syria and Iran in favor or acquiescing rather than hitting all three at once." (In political fights over Chilcot report, Iraqi lives don't matter, Robert Mackey,, 7/7/17)

And don't you just love: "If toppling Saddam is a prime objective..."

1 comment:

Grappler said...

I think that it was clear to most of us at the time that this was a premeditated war that was going to happen no matter what Saddam did. What is becoming even clearer is that this is essentially all documented in the various memos. Chilcott was far too easy on Blair. How can one not see intentional deception in what he said openly compared to what he communicated with Bush?

I am intrigued by the reference to the Philippines. Is this about the Moro conflict on Mindanao? After all, the Philippines government has been one of the most pro-US in Asia.

These clauses in the Philippines constitution pertain to its foreign policy:

Article II, Section 2: "The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice."

Article II, Section 7: "The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination."

If only other countries would adopt and maintain similar policies!