It appears that American citizens curious about why we went to war in Iraq may soon get some answers . . . from London. The British inquiry into the war is now heading into a more advanced stage after the testimony of Tony Blair. Notably, the English want to interview Bush officials. I discussed the topic on this segment of MSNBC Countdown.
Blair’s testimony was quite revealing, including his confirmation that some basic understanding was reached in April 2002 on Iraq — though he denied specifically agreeing to the invasion. That date is far earlier than the time period previously discussed on the American side and undermines the WMDs as the rationale for the invasion.
John Chilcot, head of the inquiry, confirmed that they will ask to speak to Bush officials. Perhaps they will be more forthcoming with another nation. Blair notably tied the decision to go to war to 9-11, stating that he was no longer will to “take a risk” with Saddam after the attacks. The April meeting can up in the hearing. Former British ambassador to Washington, Christopher Meyer, told an earlier hearing that an agreement had been “signed in blood” by Bush and Blair during a meeting at Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.
What is most striking for me is how these disclosures reinforce the wisdom of the Framers in demanding a declaration of war from Congress. These leaders continue post hoc rationalizations about their decisions while members of Congress continue to deny they ever really wanted to go to war in their resolution.
For discussion of the story, click here.