UK minister Robin Cook quits Blair cabinet - blasts Iraq war (merged)

Angry Cook lashes out at war

Angry Cook lashes out at war

Former cabinet minister Robin Cook has launched an angry attack on the war in Iraq and called on Tony Blair to bring UK combat units home.
Mr Cook - who resigned as Leader of the House of Commons in protest at the decision to launch hostilities without international agreement - denounced the campaign as “bloody and unnecessary”.

The ex-foreign secretary also warned that Britain and the United States risked stoking up a “long-term legacy of hatred” for the West across the Arab and Muslim world.

But a former Cabinet colleague said Mr Cook was risking the “dignity” of his resignation by suggesting troops should be withdrawn after 10 days of the war.

Mr Cook wrote: "I have already had my fill of this bloody and unnecessary war.

“I want our troops home and I want them home before more of them are killed.”

Home Secretary David Blunkett was withering about Mr Cook’s comments, saying withdrawing troops would amount to “capitulation” and strengthen Saddam Hussein and other dictators.

“I think those who take the view that Robin Cook has enunciated in his article today are mistaken,” he told BBC1’s Breakfast with Frost.

“Robin resigned with great dignity, he put his argument with great force, but it’s hard to retain that dignity or force if you advocate capitulation after just 10 days.”

He said: “We have to back our troops…we have to back those who are in conflict in bringing down Saddam Hussein and we have to ask everyone to answer the question: ‘who do you wish to win?’”

Siege ‘suffering’

In his article for the Sunday Mirror newspaper, Mr Cook said that US President George W Bush and his Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did not appear to know what to do now that their hopes that Iraq would swiftly capitulate had proved unfounded.

They appeared to be contemplating laying siege to Baghdad, which would result in massive civilian suffering and many unnecessary deaths, he said.

Mr Cook, who was among 10 members of the Labour Government to resign over the war, accused Mr Bush of “sitting pretty in the comfort of Camp David” while coalition forces risked death in an “unnecessary and badly planned” war.

“It is easy to show you are resolute when you are not one of the guys in a sandstorm peering around for snipers,” he said.

There will be a long-term legacy of hatred for the West if the Iraqi people continue to suffer from the effects of the war we started
Robin Cook
Mr Cook went on to say that no one should start a war “on the assumption that the enemy’s army will co-operate” - but that was exactly what President Bush had done.

Now the US marines had reached the outskirts of Baghdad “he does not seem to know what to do next”.

There have been suggestions that the advance on the Iraqi capital had been delayed because of Iraqi resistance and overstretched supply lines from Kuwait, up to 500 kilometres (300 miles) away.

The BBC’s David Willis, who is with US marines about 160 kilometres (100 miles) south of Baghdad, says some troops have had their rations cut to just one meal a day.

The Pentagon has denied there is any “pause” in the campaign.

Different opinions

In his article Mr Cook also raised concerns that the Iraq campaign could drag on for months.

“Shortly before I resigned, a Cabinet colleague told me not to worry about the political fallout - the war would be finished long before polling day for the May local elections,” he said.

“I just hope those who expected a quick victory are proved right.”

A Downing Street spokesman said Mr Cook had a well-known position on Iraq which was not shared by the government.

“As the prime minister said in the press conference in Camp David, we will see the military campaign through until we achieve our objectives: that is, Saddam gone and Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction disarmed.”

Mr Blunkett denied reports that Labour MPs are plotting further rebellions against Tony Blair over the war.

He said other MPs would not back Mr Cook’s view. The arguments of those against the conflict had been heard in the Commons and the issue had been voted on, he said.

He said pulling troops out now would boost Saddam and other dictators around the world.

link

“There will be a long-term legacy of hatred for the West if the Iraqi people continue to suffer from the effects of the war we started”
Robin Cook

…:k: … I wonder why others don’t realize this …

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Thats a huge shift, compared to pre-war polls. Spain, is still showing the reverse. So if this poll is reliable then it means, Mr Blair finally succeeded in convincing the British people to support him, while Mr Aznar is still failing in getting his people's support
[/QUOTE]
According to political commentators from LBC and others, that poll was unrepresentative of the actual public opinion within the UK, it was in fact carried out on behalf of the pro-war tabloid 'News of The World' solely by its readership hence shoud be disregarded.

If the prime minister wants to restore Britain's status as a major European player, he must now accept that moving closer to Europe requires, by definition, putting more distance between Britain and Bush

Exactly, it's a fact now that Blair and Britain have really becoming the laughing stock of Europe, with most deriding them as American poodles.

Occupation of Iraq illegal, Blair told, Clare Dyer
The Guardian, 22 May 2003

Leaked advice from the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, reveals that he warned Tony Blair two months ago that attempts at postwar reconstruction of Iraq by US-British occupying authorities would be unlawful without a further UN resolution.

Lord Goldsmith, the government’s chief law officer, told the prime minister that the longer the occupation went on and the more the actions of the occupying authorities departed from their main task of disarmament, the harder it would be to justify the occupation as lawful.

The advice, published in today’s New Statesman, was written in a memo to Mr Blair and circulated to a small number of government departments on March 26. The magazine says it follows oral advice from Lord Goldsmith at a cabinet meeting six days into the war, making clear that all activity beyond essential maintenance of security would be unlawful without a further security council resolution.

“My view is that a further security council resolution is needed to authorise imposing reform and restructuring of Iraq and its government,” Lord Goldsmith wrote.