Former British PM Tony Blair Defends War in Iraq, Lack of WMD’s and Removal of Sadam Hussein … “I would still have thought it right to remove him”

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair defends the war in Iraq and the ousting of Saddam Hussein, even with out the presence of WMD’s, weapons of mass destruction.

“I would still have thought it right to remove him.”

Tony Blair, hardly a conservative, defended the justification of the removal of Saddam Hussein even without the finding of WMD’s. One would think that the removal of a tyrant, rape rooms, and a future of of his two sons ruling the country would be a positive for the people and woman of Iraq.

If you asked the people of Iraq, do you think the majority of them would say they are better off without Saddam? Face it, in the end … GWB and Blair were right.

Reporting from London – Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said he would have found a justification for invading Iraq even without the now-discredited evidence that Saddam Hussein was trying to produce weapons of mass destruction.

“I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean, obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat,” Blair told the BBC in an interview to be broadcast this morning.

It was a startling admission from the onetime British leader, who was President Bush’s staunchest ally in the decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

Blair’s comments were immediately denounced by critics who accused him of using false pretenses to drag Britain into an unpopular war that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of allied troops and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians.

Speaking to broadcaster Fern Britton, Blair insisted that ousting Hussein had improved the situation in Iraq by laying the foundation for a more democratic country. He described the upcoming Iraqi elections as “probably the single most significant thing that’s happened to that region for many years.”

“I can’t really think we’d be better with him and his two sons still in charge,” Blair said of Hussein.

The Gateway Pundit reminds us of the many other justifications that the US Congress had to go to war with Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein.

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:

* Iraq’s noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors.
* Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a “threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region.”
* Iraq’s “brutal repression of its civilian population.”
* Iraq’s “capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people”.
* Iraq’s hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the alleged 1993 assassination attempt of former President George H. W. Bush, and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War. (snipped)