Recently, Tony Blair confessed in a television interview that the decision to take part in the war against Iraq was not linked to weapons of mass destruction. He said, “Obviously, you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat” posed by the Iraqi regime. So, the war had been decided upon. The justifications were unimportant, except to the degree to which they convinced the system, and Parliament. Public opinion, meanwhile, had no value. Millions of anti-war demonstrators went into the streets of London and other European capitals. Their slogans had no echo in the ears of decision-makers. The drums of war were much louder. Their sounds came from the depth of religious belief. The believer hears only the sound of the truth (the voice of Bush). He does not pay attention to trifle matters such as the killing of millions, their displacement, or the destruction of their country. Doesn't terror rely on the conviction of this religious dimension, which justifies blowing up civilians and security personnel for salvation, in the pious meaning of the term? This analysis confirms that the purported threat posed by the Saddam Hussein regime to its neighbors and the world was the worst lie of the war propaganda machine. After 13 years of sanctions, and the separation of the north of the country from Baghdad, the build-up of weapons in the Gulf, and allowing Iran to recover its arsenal, and with a NATO Turkey, and most importantly, the fact that Israel possesses nuclear weapons – after all this, Iraq became the region's weakest state in this period, and the least dangerous threat to regional and international peace. The objective of the war did not involve getting rid of weapons of mass destruction, because they did not exist, as testified to by international weapons inspectors prior to the invasion. Blair, not to speak of President George Bush, knew this. However, Blair stood up before the war, affirming that Saddam Hussein could avoid a war if he retreated (on what?) and adhered to the implementation of international resolutions. Blair was lying. The war was launched without the approval of the United Nations, with whichever “fighters” showed up, in the form of Silvio Berlusconi, Jose Maria Aznar and some eastern European leaders, or what was called the coalition of the willing. Blair's lie was discovered much prior to his recent statements. His lies were uncovered when the former US Secretary of State Colin Powell (what could a fighter of color do amid the white officials and generals?) announced that he had never been embarrassed as when he was tasked with promoting the lie about weapons of mass destruction at the United Nations Security Council, when the reason for invading Iraq changed from getting rid of these weapons to toppling the regime. Blair acknowledged his lie. However, he does not regret it. He said that the world was much safer after Saddam Hussein was ousted. He is still deeply interested in promoting the virtue of killing and terror. After the Iraq war, Israel launched a war against Lebanon, and another against Gaza, while Blair was head of the international Quartet. We did not hear a single condemnation of war from him. After the invasion, Iraq drowned in the blood of its people, who are killed by believers, from both our side and theirs. Blair will repeat his statements before the committee investigating the reasons for Britain's participation in the war (the Chilcot Inquiry). He will be more self-assured, because it is not summoning the head of the international inspectors, Hans Blix, and does not have the power to prosecute. The committee was established to draw conclusions, for the future – the future of British institutions, and not the future of Iraq, or any country whose people become subject to extinction.
