Former MI6 chief says Britain was 'dragged' into Iraq war
Telegraph / Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent
03-May-2009 (4 comments)

MI6 was blamed for the failure of intelligence that took Britain to war after helping produce a dossier in which Tony Blair claimed that Iraq was ready to use weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes.

Mr Inkster said the world was moving from "being policed by America to be policed by nobody" and the danger of an increasingly unstable world meant populations were likely to fall back on the "snake oil and voodoo" of religious and nationalistic movements


Damaagh sukhteh mikharim

by Ostaad on

The "Intel community" seems to have realized they were sold out by the sleek London and Washington political apparatchiks - some of whom still wear bow ties.

The Intel people mainly belong to the groups that describe themselves as patriots,  and they will soon be answering the call of duty and the cry of their motherland/homeland do what the KGB did to the Soviet system. The KGB changed the Soviet system and it is still in charge of running Russia.  What will stop the CIA and a few other intelligence agencies, which total about seventeen in the US, change the current system in Europe and N. America?




It was very obvious! Bush bullied Tony B. who looked like puppet

by gol-dust on

Not surprise. The reward of free oil looked good! But when you lose...everyone points a finger


Margaret Tatcher lead the US into war with Iraq

by anglophile on

During the first Iraqi war it was Mrs Tatcher who was leading the American administration in to the war. Without her approval and cooperation Us would not have gone into the war as they could not afford a second Vietnam. Therefore, Kurush's comment is nonsense.

While John Major was playing a second fiddle to Geroge Bush junior, Tony Blair changed all that. He was a symbol of respect and intellectual superiority to both Bill Clinton and GWB. Was it not for Blair's intervention, Bush had attacked Iraq before Afghanistan.


So sorry chaps but British prime ministers are and will remain to be a stumbling block in all Ameircan foreign policy decisions. This is hardly a poodle's job.


the nutjob!

by Kurush (not verified) on

In the heyday of the Vietnam war, Britian was many times coopted by the US to send troops to make the war look like an international 'coalition". Like the Iraq invasion & the 'Coalition of the Willing', the Americans did not want to have blood on their hands alone, they were looking to share the burden of bad conscience with others. Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, refused bluntely. That was when the British PM had a little backbone and not prostrate poodles. Like the Iraq invasion, Britian's economic dependence on the US was being used as a leverage to force the British to go along with the Vietnam war. Richard Helms, the CIA chief, then digged up dirt on Wilson in a smear campaign to de-stablize Wilson. Denis Healey, Labour's Defence Minister, recalled the US pressure on Britain: "The United States... during the Vietnam War did not want to be the only country killing coloured people on their own soil." PM Thatcher changed all of that, now British PMs are nothing but US poodles