Is the world a safer place without Saddam Hussein? The simple answer is yes. But were Britain and the US right to invade the country and remove him? Well, hindsight says no. But at the time it appeared that Saddam was a clear and present danger and the US and President George W. Bush were prepared to invade with or without Britain. Prime Minister Tony Blair decided to stick with the US and stand "shoulder to shoulder" with Britain´s main and most powerful ally in 2003.

Blair made the case for war on half truths, but it must be remembered that Saddam had carried out a list of atrocities against his own people, he was a threat to the Middle East and had, after all, invaded Kuwait ten years earlier.

Important lessons can be learned from the whole Iraq war affair, but it be must be remembered that securing accurate intelligence in that part of the world is not easy. In hindsight the Iraq war was a mistake and probably made the Middle East a more unstable place. Blair's biggest mistake was wanting to stand "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush. The invasion cost the lives of thousands of civilians and service people, and if the necessary preparations for the post-war reconstruction had been in place then, the whole outcome could have been very different. But the fact that there was no plan is the biggest tragedy of the war and invasion.

The US and Britain won the war but lost the peace. And Blair and Bush are to blame. You can't go to war without a road map for peace.


To be able to write a comment, you have to be registered and be logged in.

* Mandatory fields

Currently there are no comments.