Post #3077846

Alastair Campbell defending the 2003 invasion of Iraq is nuts. Especially his claims Blair was given plausible information and that we cannot criticize it *in hindsight* (yes, we can, and we also did it back then, maybe he just doesn't understand the concept of evidence); And the idea that *we cannot prove* that Saddam wouldn't have been a threat if the US/UK hadn't attacked Iraq. Why do we need to prove that Saddam wouldn't have been a threat based on some warmongers' conspiracy theories?