The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
Send Our War Criminals to the Hague Court
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This week’s Chilcot report on Britain’s role in the 2003 invasion of Iraq was as polite and guarded as a proper English tea party. No direct accusations, no talk of war crimes by then Prime Minister Tony Blair or his guiding light, President George W. Bush. But still pretty damning.

Such government reports and commissions, as was wittily noted in the delightful program ‘Yes, Prime Minister,’ are designed to obscure rather than reveal the truth and bury awkward facts in mountains of paper.

And beneath mountains of lies. The biggest lie on both sides of the Atlantic was that the invasion and destruction of Iraq was the result of ‘faulty intelligence.’ The Bush and Blair camps and the US and British media keep pushing this absurd line.

This writer, who had covered Iraq since 1976, was one of the first to assert that Baghdad had no so-called weapons of mass destruction, and no means of delivering them even if it did. For this I was dropped and black-listed by the leading US TV cable news network and leading US newspapers.

I had no love for the brutal Saddam Hussein, whose secret police threatened to hang me as a spy. But I could not abide the intense war propaganda coming from Washington and London, served up by the servile, mendacious US and British media.

The planned invasion of Iraq was not about nuclear weapons or democracy, as Bush claimed. Two powerful factions in Washington were beating the war drums: ardently pro-Israel neoconservatives who yearned to see an enemy of Israel destroyed, and a cabal of conservative oil men and imperialists around Vice President Dick Cheney who sought to grab Iraq’s huge oil reserves at a time they believed oil was running out. They engineered the Iraq War, as blatant and illegal an aggression as Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939.

Britain’s smarmy Tony Blair tagged along with the war boosters in hopes that the UK could pick up the crumbs from the invasion and reassert its former economic and political power in the Arab world. Blair had long been a favorite of British neoconservatives. The silver-tongued Blair became point man for the war in preference to the tongue-twisted, stumbling George Bush. But the real warlord was VP Dick Cheney.

There was no ‘flawed intelligence.’ There were intelligence agencies bullied into reporting a fake narrative to suit their political masters. And a lot of fake reports concocted by our Mideast allies like Israel and Kuwait.

After the even mild Chilcot report, Blair’s reputation is in tatters, as it should be. How such an intelligent, worldly man could have allowed himself to be led around by the doltish, swaggering Bush is hard to fathom. Europe’s leaders and Canada refused to join the Anglo-American aggression. France, which warned Bush of the disaster he would inflict, was slandered and smeared by US Republicans as ‘cheese-eating surrender monkeys.’

ORDER IT NOW

In the event, the real monkeys were the Bush and Blair governments. Saddam Hussain, a former US ally, was deposed and lynched. Iraq, the most advanced Arab nation, was almost totally destroyed. Up to one million Iraqis may have been killed, though the Chilcot report claimed only a risible 150,000. As Saddam had predicted, the Bush-Blair invasion opened the gates of hell, and out came al-Qaida and then ISIS.

The US and British media, supposedly the bulwark of democracy, rolled over and became an organ of government war propaganda. Blair had the august BBC purged for failing to fully support his drive for war. BBC has never recovered.

Interestingly, this week’s news of the Chilcot investigation was buried deep inside the New York Times on Thursday. The Times was a key partisan of the war. So too the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, and the big TV networks.

Without their shameful connivance, the Iraq War might not have happened.

Bush and Blair have the deaths of nearly 4,500 US soldiers on their heads, the devastation of Iraq, our $1 trillion war, the ever-expanding mess in the Mideast, and the violence what we wrongly blame on ‘terrorism’ and so-called ‘radical Islam.’

The men and women responsible for this biggest disaster in our era should be brought to account. As long as Bush and Blair swan around and collect speaking fees, we have no right to lecture other nations, including Russia and China, on how to run a democracy or rule of law. Bush and Blair should be facing trial for war crimes at the Hague Court.

(Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Britain, Iraq War 
Hide 27 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. dearieme says:

    “Tony Blair tagged along with the war boosters in hopes that the UK could pick up the crumbs from the invasion and reassert its former economic and political power in the Arab world.” No chance: Tony was in it for Tony, he’s never given a fig for British interests.

    “How such an intelligent … man could have allowed himself to be led around by the doltish, swaggering Bush is hard to fathom.”

    (i) Blair isn’t intelligent: maybe he is by the standards of American public life, but certainly not by the standards of British public life. He’s a somewhat dim, terribly vain, and woefully ignorant man.

    (ii) Maybe he had a girlish crush on Bush. More likely his narcissism made him want to play to the most important audience of them all, the Americans. Maybe he realised that developing a reputation in the US would let him make lots of money after he’d left office. Whatever the explanation is, you can bet it’s Tony-centric: to repeat, British interests will have had nothing to do with it.

    • Replies: @Carroll Price
  2. turtle says:

    Right on as usual, Eric.

  3. mtn cur says:

    The stupidity defense would clear them both. When the supreme court elected W president, a liberal friend came near crying over it. I said don’t worry, Bush will wind up wearing his presidency like a chicken killing dog with a dead leghorn around its neck.

  4. Diogenes says:

    Perhaps Eric gives BLIAR too much credit, just like those British voters which elected him into leadership and power. As often seems to be the case most voters seem to be very poor judges of character often electing the most venal people into positions of power only to discover after the fact that they were mistaken in their choice.

    [Sadly most often the choice is the “lesser evil” which is not a moral choice at all. Better not to vote and legitimate an evil choice and thereby an evil political system.]

    Those mistaken people were gullible and insouciant and thus easily deceived by the MSM which they should have never trusted. Best not to be informed by TV, radio, magazines and newspapers but rather seek information and alternate views via the internet.

    Inasmuch Eric tells it like it is; it is no wonder he was banned from the MSM.

  5. Blair’s speech to Congress was the tipping point in the selling of the Iraq war. Bush was having difficulties with his pitching of the war before that. I watched the stirring speech on TV with a Vietnam Marine Vet who stated during the speech, that’s it, we’re going to war.

  6. Good article. Those responsible for war crimes should be brought to justice. And the Iraq war–as well as NATO’s needless destruction of Libya–definitely constitute War Crimes. Big time. But Margolis does make one erroneous charge; namely, that the Iraq war was partly engineered by oil companies and driven by oil concerns. This ridiculous myth has been circulating among Leftists for years.

    In fact, there is no evidence and there never has been any evidence that any US oil company has ever lobbied for a Mideast war. This charge is an absolute fraud. Propagandists like Noam Chomsky cling to it for obvious reasons.

    http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/new/?p=3776#.V4M47LgrLIU

    • Agree: Carroll Price
  7. St Just says:

    Thank you for the article. Civilization will never improve if we let these war murderers get off easy.We owe it to mankind and the future to make examples of these super criminals.

  8. […] Oil, Israel, not faulty intelligence, were real reasons for the invasion of Iraq. http://www.unz.com/emargolis/send-our-war-criminals-to-the-hague-court/ […]

  9. @dearieme

    George Bush is obviously dumb as a lamp post, but whether Tony Blair is stupid or super-intelligent has nothing to do with the crimes they committed. Both should have, long ago, been tried, convicted and hung for committing the most obvious war crimes history will ever record. The only difference is that the crimes other known war criminals committed are called war crimes, while the ones Bush and Blair committed are called “mistakes” blamed on “flawed intelligence”. And it doesn’t stop with Bush and Blair. The number, names and photographs of these known war criminals are well known and legion in number. There nothing wrong with London or Washington that a few thousand feet of 3/4″ Hemp rope would not cure, over-night.

  10. @Mark Green

    You are right of course. It’s Israel, the 4,000 pound elephant in the room, that everyone avoids like the Black Plague. Unless and until that changes, things will continue as they are.

  11. JackOH says:

    “Bush and Blair should be facing trial for war crimes at the Hague Court.” Agree, reluctantly, sadly.

    How does anyone get around the fact that Bush and Company launched a needless war of aggression in Iraq II? Can anyone offer even a half-arsed reason why Bush and Company ought to not be tried? (The late Vincent Bugliosi and others have offered reasons why Bush and Company ought to be tried under U. S. law and international law.)

  12. The same warmongers are still engaged in their work. Iraq is done, Syria is almost finished. There remains one more ‘existential threat’ in the middle east – Iran. After that it may be necessary to rein-in Saudi Arabia and or Turkey. That will put Israel where it needs to be. But Russia is a temporary distraction that just might knock all the middle eastern endeavours cock-a-hoop.

    For there are another less-focused coterie of warriors who think that it’s high time Putin was brought down a peg or three – or completely if possible.

  13. Kiza says:

    What a pie-in-the-sky article, peppered with I-told-you-so self advertising. Two reader monkeys even typed: “right on”.

    I got news for you: it is never gonna happen. When TPTB indict Hillary Clinton for her numerous crimes, then will also Tony Blair and George Bush end up in the Hague dock. If grandma had a jet engine under her skirt, she would be a jet plane. As if we needed some Chilcot Report to tell us that the attack on Iraq was a war crime, like all USUK wars before and after. Before this attack millions of people aware that Iraqi WMDs were pure lies came out in London to demonstrate against the war. This 2 Million people demonstration meant absolutely nothing to the British political establishment, which went ahead with the war as if nobody was against and everybody could be fooled by totally dumb claims of Iraqi nuclear mushroom clouds. And now after some silly report, there is a chorus of I-told-you-so mugs who rediscovered war crimes and blame them all on only one person. Almost the whole parliament are war criminals (George Galloway and few other excluded).

    As Noam Chomsky wrote in his better days: no US President during and after WW2 would pass for anything but a war criminal. Same for Blair, he is a war criminal but he is not the only one, no matter what this joke of a journalist writes.

    We cannot get even the report’s fall-guy to fall into the war crimes court, let alone get the whole rotten British Parliament and US Congress to take responsibility for the terrible shemozzle.

  14. William says:

    It is beyond dispute that FBI director Comey’s decision not to recommend prosecution for Hillary Clinton’s dangerous disregard for all rules and regulations make it even more clear, crystal clear, indubitably clear that no U.S. high govt. official will ever be indicted for the horrendous war crimes committed while in office. Vice president Dick Cheney is as much a war criminal as any of the Nazis we hanged after WWII and should be tried and hanged by the neck. Not even any criticism of their behavior will be forthcoming, however. The U.S. is now a nation which does not observe the rule of law. Instead of being the moral leaders of the world, our congress and govt. have cravenly imitated Israeli policy. The Roman Empire lasted a hell of a lot longer than the U.S. empire is apparently destined to last.

    • Replies: @Avery
  15. Avery says:
    @William

    {Dick Cheney is as much a war criminal as any of the Nazis we hanged after WWII and should be tried and hanged by the neck.}

    Right.
    Well said.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  16. Forget the Hague.

    They all deserve Stalin-style show trials preceded by NKVD inspired interrogations and followed by a lifetime at hard labor and no chance for parole.

    • Replies: @woodNfish
  17. woodNfish says:

    Add Bill Clinton, Janet Reno and every FBI, BATF, Local PD, prosecutors, judges and every other government thug involved in the torture and mass murder of the Branch Davidians in Waco Texas in 1993 to the list of who should be tried for crimes against humanity, torture and mass murder at the Hague. And again, it will never happen.

  18. woodNfish says:
    @Jacques Sheete

    followed by a lifetime at hard labor and no chance for parole.

    No. As long as they are alive they can be pardoned. They deserve death.

  19. Saddam wasn’t lynched, he was brought to trial and executed under a judicial sentence.
    Moammar Qaddafi, HE was lynched. And the next president of the USA sat there and cackled.

  20. Barbara says:

    Of course the Hague is rigged, just like the whole dirty ball of wax. We need to shut-it-down and build a new international force of sincere and powerful justice-for-all that’s not aligned with the global terrorists.

    Little reported is that Jill Stein states Snowden will have a position in her office. I read over and over from the lay-down-and-die crowd that it’s useless and don’t bother voting. BS! Demand paper voting, stock your potential office with personalities the people know and admire, that gets free media. Get creative and think-out-of-the-box. We all have the duty of citizens to do our part, no matter how small as together the number is-very-big.

    We shouldn’t disparage anyone in the truth and peace movement, like the commenter above did, as it’s self defeating. Save the disparagement for those-who-deserve-it. The terrorists like bush, cheney, kill bill, soros, rockefeller, kissinger, etc… We need to create the court that will bring them to justice once-and-for-all.

  21. Rehmat says:
    @Avery

    All Nazis were not criminals. There were lots of Zionist Christians and Crypto Jews among them who helped World Zionist movement to occupy Palestine to avoid another Jewish holocaust at the hands of European Christians.

    Towards the end of World War II Adolf Eichmann (on behalf of Heinrich Himmler) offered Rezso Kasztner, a Zionist Hungarian leader, the freedom of up to one million Jews in return for 10,000 trucks. Surprisingly enough, this offer was ignored by the Zionist organizations that had realized by then that the annihilation of European Jewry would help generate enough support among the nations for the future establishment of the Zionist entity. Apparently, the Nazi offer was reduced to a single train and just 600 devoted Zionist Hungarian Jews. Clearly, the Zionists were interested in saving neither assimilated nor Orthodox Jews.

    The SS (Schutz-Staffel, or Protective Echelon) was organized by Heinrich Himmler on Hitler’s orders, and it functioned as a Nazi brain trust. According to Zionist Jewish historian, Lenni Brenner, by 1934, several Zionist German had reached top positions in the SS, like von Mildenstein and chief of the SS Security Service Reinhard Heydrich. Both of them penned articles in praise of Zionism in Nazi propaganda organs – Der Angriff:”A Nazi went to Palestine” and extolling racist Zionism for Das Schwarze Korps. Hitler’s propaganda minister, Dr.Goebbels had a long pro-radical Zionist article published in a Nazi publication named Der Angriff and had a medal struck, bearing on one side the swastika, on the other the Star of Zion (aka David).

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/02/01/some-nazi-leaders-betrayed-by-zionists/

  22. We hung Germans, Japanese, and other national war criminals by the dozens after World War II, wheras our home grown war criminals not only get off Scott-free, but in such cases as George Bush, Sr. and Bill Clinton, are treated as highly cited citizens of influence and celebrity, while George, Jr., the worst of the lot, is being quietly allowed, if not elevated, back into respectful society.

    The long history and incredible scope of international war crimes committed against the people and nation of Iraq by three successive American Presidents is even more staggering than most Americans of nowadays are aware. Phase One, Desert Storm, was initiated by George Bush, Sr. in 1991, Phase Two was brutally curated for eight barbaric years afterwards by Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State, mass child killer, Madeleine Albright, culminating in Phase Three, the final destruction of the entire secular society, economy and culture of Iraq in 2003 by dim headed, neocon driven George Bush ,Jr.

    When and, if, the whole, long period of death and destruction we laid on Iraq and its people is spread out in sheer sight for the contemporary world to see, it will display a shocking, undenaible record of one of the most dehumanizing, brutal War Crimes in modern history, as surely as was that of Adolf Hitler in World War II.

    • Replies: @Lost american
  23. @Mark Green

    Mark Green-thank you. In 2002 I started researching PNAC, Big Oil, and all rumors going around about why the US would invade Iraq. It was made clear by dozens of writers including Pat Buchanan that oil was not (as you indicated) a reason for invading Iraq. Buchanan made it clear that there were a lot cheaper ways of getting oil than destroying the infrastructure of a country and having an extended war. But the “War For Oil” rumor spread, and on the ground I told troops that they were not there for the oil.
    I guess the best one could say to troops in Iraq was that the US was also going up against Al Qaeda and “preventing fighting on the streets in America”. One doesn’t want to sound too negative.
    Many throw around that a million Iraqis died. That figure is a major distortion. In this article, 150,000 is mentioned. OK, but who knows. The figures I had for the years 2003-2007 were much lower. All deaths were unnecessary- it was all the work of a cabal of neocon Zionists.

    Thanks to Eric Margolis for alluding to the role of the Israeli firsters.
    And thanks for the mention of Noam Chomsky , the man who never had a bad thing to say about persistent use by Israel of WP and depleted uranium against the Palestinians.
    In the late 60s and early 70s Chomsky crucified us Marines and soldiers with the Vietnam war . Chomsky became a celebrity activist and he could afford it- he was protected by the NY Times (Bolshevik Jewish) and he was a professor at MIT. Chomsky wasn’t taking any big chances.
    He was not out demonstrating against the Iraq invasion- I guess this neocon Zionist war against Iraq was not worth it-he could not be in the public’s eye and he could have been affected poorly like Norman Finkelstein.

  24. @Alexander Contis

    I agree Alexander but I always like to throw in the PNAC gang when Bush’s name is mentioned. I usually add Wolfowitz and Perle, but of course most of the USA Congress and Senate voted to invade Iraq in 2003. It seems most of our politicos are asleep on the job and beholding to Israel.
    I was always curious if our Generals and Admirals put up a fight against going to war. I often wonder if most of our Colonels and Generals had heard of PNAC. I was stunned in 2003 or 2004 when Colin Powell said he was deceived by it all and at the time and today I am still wondering how someone like me can research so much in 2002 and 2003 and statesmen like Powell felt deceived and misinformed.
    I would think our military told the President and so on that an invasion of Iraq /bombing would be terrible and incredibly stupid (yes, Netanyahu and American Zionists) so I believe we must have some bright, informed higher ups in the military. Some must have guts in addition to being almost complete “yes men”.
    If Powell felt deceived then how in the world can he get into the skin of a young man who has had multiple limbs blown off or is now a neurologic disaster or has had his penis and testes shot off and so on? I don’t care about his time in Vietnam- maybe that was just a game and a stepping stone for him.
    I know Wolfowitz doesn’t care- he toured Walter Reed after 2003- can’t remember year- he was clueless; cannot empathize- must feel like most of these “leaders” and PNAC gang that war is just like a football game. I guess it doesn’t matter that one cannot call a do over when that bomb goes off or that RPG shatters your pelvis.

  25. I meant to say Iran in above comment but Iraq will suffice.

  26. Please remove any name other than Lost American or just pull my last comment. It was verbose and I should not reflect on how others feel. Thank you. I wonder why these leaders rush to war -the consequences are usually horrible for the health of participants.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.