Burning Downing the House!

Cannonfire points us to After Downing Street, which I've heard much of but had yet to find the time to visit. Apologies.

A whole pile o' Downing Street-like documents from the Brits seems to paint an ever-clearer picture of how they were reluctant as the Bushies shoved Iraq down their throats.

1 - ods020308
2 - fcolegal020308
3 - manning020314
4 - meyer020318
5 - ricketts020322
6 - straw020325
One fun quote (from link #2 above):

In the UK's view, a violation of Iraq's obligations which undermines the basis of the cease fire in resolution 687 (1991) can revive the authorisation to use force in resolution 678 (1990). As the cease-fire was proclaimed by the Council in resolution 687 (1991), it is for the Council to assess whether any such breach of those obligations has occurred. The US have a rather different view: they maintain that the assessment of breach is for individual member States. We are not aware of any other State which supports this view. [emphasis mine]

Downing Street's page does a good job of painting a few quick quotes to show how the whole plan unfolded itself in horrifying logic--all driven by the predetermined goal of unnecessary war w/ Iraq to appease Bush.

For Iraq, "regime change" does not stack up. It sounds like a grudge between Bush and Saddam. Much better, as you have suggested, to make the objective ending the threat to the international community from Iraqi WMD

Frequent After Downing Street if you can. They're not letting go of this, whether the Press wants to dig up evidence of their own failure to ask questions or not.

As Fox News' Bill O'Liely might ask, "Why do the Brits hate America?"

mcolley
I'm not liberal, I'm just paying attention