call to charge howard with war crimes, page-256

Mr Sargent, It was not about freeing Iraqi people nor getting rid of Saddam. The US adminstration is on the record for saying the occupation of Iraq purely to oust Saddam was not worth the loss of US soldier's lives nor the quagmire that would follow. The US have never ever stated the war was to get rid of Saddam and free the Iraqi people nor did Howard ever make that claim.

In fact Howard's reason was because there was an undeniable threat due to the WMD to Australia's security. This was in spite of evidence otherwise by our very own weapons inpector. It is in fACt at odds with comments made by Colin Powell who shortly before 9/11 stated that the sanctions against Iraq had rsulted in their inability to develop WMD.

Plus it is at oods with studies that state Australia is in fact at greater risk for entering this conflict.

The ugliest fact of all is perhaps that we have denied the few freedoms Iraqi people actually had under Saddam. I cannot imagine fleeing a city being bombed by foreigners only to be shot by them for not stopping on command. Does this make any sense at all? Plus the thousands and thousands jailed with no charge, innocent went they get sent to jail on vague suspicion, recruited as terrorist by the time they are let go uncharged, and somehow hard to blame them.

When you go to war you have obligations to ensure the security of the people. This has not happened, in fact the death toll is appalling.

We have failed.

PS. Not about the oil technically, maybe more to do with Saddam pushing for oil to be traded in Euro, not USD. PLus the strategic position of Iraq for the oil region and easy it would become a quagmire with the invasion. A weakness that both the US and Al Queda seized uppon with glee.