[zovat]

Ok, here is my only post on this thread.

Blair followed the advice he wanted to hear (as have we all from time to time).

statement 1 - "not sure - may be illegal - may not".
statement 2 - "not illegal in terms of the resolutions thus far passed"

pretty similar - just a different angle.

Personally, Saddam needed ousting, this was the best chance of that happening (as already stated by others, France had already said that they would veto any further UN resolution).

Various states had a lot of money invested in SH (including the UK), and some of those were more afraid of losing that investment, than what SH was doing to his people, and what WMD he either did or did not have (even if he did not have them, the scientists to make them were still in Iraq, and he still had labs that could produce them if required).

<off topic slightly>
To those that want us to withdraw from Iraq before an Iraqi government is fully established and supported (including having the Iraqi Defense Force trained and fully manned), I can only say - do you want the sacrifices made by those of us that fought, and more importantly those that died, to give the average Iraqi their freedom to be for nought, by withdrawing from the country and leaving it to decline into civil war, and have another dictator take power ?

<back on topic>

It has been established that there was some "less that sound" information on which the decision was based - but lets stop bleating about that, and concentrate on how we can get the country stable, and get our boys back home knowing that the job is complete, and our comrades died for a reason..