General   (General discussion, talk about anything.)

Started by: Tommy Two Stroke (5303)

Well they wouldn't have voted for it if they had known there were no weapons of mass destruction, but Tony was hell bent on invading Iraq, and I agreed with it, dodgy dossier or not, Saddam had caused enough trouble in the world, and he needed to be got rid of, but what amazed me was that even though experts were saying that a dangerous power vacuum would be created in Iraq, which could lead to civil war, which would be far more deadly than beating the Iraqi army, and we and the USA would be smack bang in the middle of it, and we would get hurt, and that is exactly what happened, so why didn't George and Tony not concentrate more on planning for a post Saddam Iraq, rather than thinking everything would be OK once they had got rid of Saddam.

Replied: 13th Oct 2019 at 13:20

Report Abuse

Only use this form to report abuse about the post displayed above. If you have a query or wish to make a comment, do not use this form.

Your IP No. ( will be logged.

* Enter the 5 digit code to the right of the input box. Don't worry if you make a mistake, you will get another chance. Your comments won't be lost.