Tony Blair’s advisers privately questioned if the US had “proper political control” of military operations in Iraq after a senior US official confided that George W Bush believed he was on a “mission from God” against Iraqi insurgents, newly released documents reveal.
Blair needed to “deliver some difficult messages” to the then US president for a “more measured approach” in April 2004, following a US military operation to suppress a major uprising in the city of Falluja, according to papers released to the National Archives in Kew, west London.
In a surprisingly candid conversation, recorded in a document marked “please protect very carefully”, Richard “Rich” Armitage, then US deputy secretary of state, told Sir David Manning, then UK ambassador, that Bush had needed a “dose of reality” after demanding US forces “kick ass” in Falluja, where US troops were engaged in a bloody battle with Iraqi militants after four private military contractors were ambushed and killed.
Bush had initially been influenced by his military generals and “wanted to kick ass” with US marines occupying the city. But politicians on the coalition provisional authority, set up after Saddam’s fall, feared the US military response could damage hopes of establishing an independent Iraqi administration.
Bush backed off after being “faced with this ‘dose of reality’”, Manning reported back to No 10.
Independent military contractors is a really spun way to say fucking mercenaries.
Point me to any article by the established mainstream media, and I’ll point you to the spin.
This does not surprise me at all. Sadly, most of the world’s leaders are talking to imaginary ghosts and making political decisions based on what these hallucinations tell them. We live in clown world.
The fatal flaw at the bottom of democracy. The qualities that make someone a successful politician (read: convincing people to vote for you) have little to do with being a good leader. When they coexist in the same person it’s by coincidence.
I said this in a thread yesterday too, but… remember when everyone though America couldn’t possibly have a president worse than George W. Bush?
Nu-cu-lar.
Bush did it for his corporate masters, Blair did it for misguided righteousness and Howard did it because he wanted to be a war time prime minister…all of them are fucking war criminals.
More interested to know what Bush’s views on Saudi Arabia were.
News…? From 20 years ago?
Yes, when new information about an important historical event is revealed, it is news.
Similarly, when Mark Felt admitted on his deathbed that he was the famed Deep Throat who passed the Watergate break-in information to Woodward and Bernstein, ultimately leading to Richard Nixon’s resignation, it was 36 years later. It was also a top news headline, and not just in the U.S.
In this case, the news is “hey maybe that was a bad idea” 20 years after this failure of a war started under false pretenses. It seems obvious by now.
No, the news is exactly what it says it is. I’m not sure why you think new information about a historical event is not relevant information. Should history be fragmentary when it doesn’t have to be?
Check the date on the article.
Consequences in 80
