Guardian-Blair refused three offers to stay out of Iraq (Woodward's book)

[G_j]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4904522-103550,00.html

Blair refused three offers to stay out of Iraq
Book says Bush was concerned at PM's plight

Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Monday April 19, 2004
The Guardian

Eleven days before the invasion of Iraq, Tony Blair was given three chances by President George Bush to keep British troops out of the war at no political cost, but refused, according to a book published today.

An impressively sourced account of the run-up to the war - Plan of Attack by Watergate journalist Bob Woodward - depicts a president acutely conscious of the political cost to Mr Blair of tying his fortunes so closely to Washington's policy on Iraq.

On the day of Mr Bush's offer - March 9, 2003 - Tony Blair faced a rebellion by Labour MPs opposed to the war, and it was becoming increasingly clear that the United Nations would not produce the international sanction for the war that was so important to Mr Blair's credibility at home.

Mr Blair's government and his political career were in peril, and the White House evidently believed they owed their ally a favour. Mr Blair had repeatedly proven his loyalty to the administration and, as it emerges in the book, had been on board for war on Iraq for months - even while professing in public to be committed to the use of UN weapons inspections to disarm Saddam Hussein.

..more..

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Woodward may add a PM to his list

of fallen heads of state, or at least claim partial credit... and I will even hope that the revelations only add to the driping on the administration.

[JoFerret]

2. He saw this as a chance to prance

on the world stage. He will reap the whirlwind. Let us hope the Labour party can remove him in time to win an election. (This is not looking likely.)
Where is the outrage? Who is speaking out? Where is the outcry?

[barbaraann]

4. I just checked amazon uk and Woodward's book is #7.

I think there will be some outrage soon.

[qb]

3. I remember Rummy's comment that we don't need help from England

That must have been one of the chances.

[AP]

5. They didn't want the Brits in there. The US wanted free reign to create

chaos.

The UK had to go in to look after the interests of the EU because chaos in the ME would mean economic hardship in Europe. Economic hardship in Europe would mean the election of fascist governments (see Germany before WWII).