Blair says UN resolution not needed for war -- says attacking Iraq was his idea

Fred Feldman ffeldman at bellatlantic.net
Tue Jan 14 19:52:09 MST 2003


Seeking to display firm backing for Bush, Blair is now attempting to
unhesitatingly direct Britain's course toward the invasion of Iraq after  a
brief period of wavering and in the face of rising opposition in many
quarters Blair and Bush hope that presenting a firm front in declaring that
they don't need a new resolution will scare the rest of the Security Council
into giving them the resolution they very much want, something that is
certain not to happen if they show any lack of will.

Both Blair and Bush have now so firmly committed themselves to war that only
a political crisis of world proportions will prevent them from doing so. At
this point,  failing to invade and occupy Iraq would represent a defeat for
U.S. and British imperialism almost on the scale of the British withdrawal
from Suez in 1956 and the U.S. defeat in Vietnam, and it would seal the fate
of both the current U.S. and British governments.

A crisis of  this scope is not absolutely excluded before the invasion
starts.  Pieces of it are already in place: Korea, Venezuela (and the
related developments in Brazil), the rising antiwar protests and the
participation  of the working class in the United States and Britain are
among the features, and a strong showing in Washington this Saturday will
help things along.

The war is taking on more characteristics of  an adventure -- one driven  by
a recklessness stemmming from  the need of both U.S. and British imperialism
to show their capacity to expand and conqauer in the face of growing
economic and other difficulties.  But preventing it remains an uphill
battle.

Washngton is counting on an explosion of high-tech savagery  with few
precedents not only to overwhelm Iraq but to terrorize the defiant ones in
Korea and Latin America. They count on the   the combination of initial
patriotic identification with U.S. and British troops in combat and
government intimidation of dissent to reduce and paralyze resistance at
home.  They are preparing a gigantic troop concentration to provide an
invasion and  occupation army for all of Iraq -- sufficient to police and
intimidate the restive Kurds and Shiites in Iraq, as well as the Baghdad
region -- to prevent the apparent victory to disintegrate as has been
tending to happen in Afghanistan.

I think they will lose that bet over time but that is tomorrow's fight.  And
we won't be able fight that battle well unless we fight to the end to
prevent this criminal war from happening.  And the U.S. and British decision
to invade Iraq does not settle that question.
Fred Feldman

The Times Of India

UK perceived Iraq threat before US: Blair
RASHMEE Z AHMED
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
JANUARY 14, 2003


-"If George Bush and America were not raising this
issue, I would be urging them to raise it because it
is important," Blair told journalists late on Monday.
-Blair's remarks, which some commentators described as
the most hawkish and self-important to date, come as
the latest of a series of opinion polls documented
falling public support in Britain for a Gulf War
II-type operation.
- At the weekend, the biggest British naval deployment
since the 1982 Falklands War began with its aircraft
carrier Ark Royal sailing for the gulf.

LONDON: Assuming an arguably more hawkish stance on
Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction
than even President Bush, British Prime Minister Tony
Blair has said that it was he - and not the American
president - who had raised the subject at their first
meeting in February 2001.

"If George Bush and America were not raising this
issue, I would be urging them to raise it because it
is important," Blair told journalists late on Monday.

Even as Britain cobbled together in London on Tuesday,
a scaled-down, foreign minister-level meeting on
Palestinian statehood and reform, Blair added "Anyone
who believes in today's world that you can have these
groups and these weapons proliferating and Britain not
be involved is, I think, naïve and misguided," he
said. "It is a matter of time, unless we act and take
a stand, before terrorism and weapons of mass
destruction come together."

Blair's remarks, which some commentators described as
the most hawkish and self-important to date, come as
the latest of a series of opinion polls documented
falling public support in Britain for a Gulf War
II-type operation.

But in a supremely-confident statement, Blair said:
"Polls or no polls, my job in a situation like this is
sometimes to say the things that people don't want to
hear".

He added that Britain would prefer a second United
Nations Security Council resolution authorising war on
Iraq, but was willing to go ahead with military action
even without one.

Meanwhile, in the continuing countdown to war, British
logistics experts have now arrived in Kuwait to plan
for the despatch of combat troops. At the weekend, the
biggest British naval deployment since the 1982
Falklands War began with its aircraft carrier Ark
Royal sailing for the gulf.

In less than three weeks, Blair is to meet Bush in
Washington to discuss Iraq.






~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list