And it could be claimed that the world’s current problems started when Bush and Blair invaded Iraq.

Saddam had WMDs – we all know that and Hans Blix believed he still had them at the time war was declared. If Syria’s Baathist regime falls perhaps we’ll hear where they went.

Iraq is more of a democracy than any other big country in the area.

There is plenty of evidence that the Iraqi regime co-operated with Al Queda before 9-11, it’s just that people don’t want to believe it.

American narcissism reigns supreme. Contrary to popular belief the ” Insurgency” had widespread support among Iraqi’s due to atrocities like Fallujah and Abe Graib. It was a national uprising against a foreign invasion and occupation. It was not just fuelled by the foreign ,sectarian al qaeda killers.

Indeed thopse of a machivellian disposition speculate that the Neo-cons like Cheney new if they invaded every budding Jihadi in the arab world would flood into Iraq to fight the infidels.

Pity no one asked the Iraqi’s permission to use their country as a battleground.

Closing a another shameful chapter in American/British imperialism, however I am sure as with Vietnam hollywood will turn the Yanks into the victims.

It depends what you think the mission was.

If you think it was to demonstrate that:

1)the West is willing to take casualties in a conflict with regimes in the Middle East so don’t think you can irritate the West without paying a price.

2)the West has the power to inflict lasting damage on a country short of total destruction.

then the mission was certainly accomplished.

It’s not a policy I would have followed but it’s a plausible explanation for attacking a country that

a)was not a threat

b) had nothing to do with 9/11 even though that mistaken belief was allowed to live in parts of the public consciousness

c) had no WMDs.