On the same day that, on its front page of Middle East news, the BBC shows the death toll of civilians in Iraq since the invasion to be well in excess of 100,000, the former British Prime Minister declares that he would have been in favour of invading Iraq, even if he had known Saddam Hussein had not possessed weapons of mass destruction. One can understand why he has now admitted his commitment to regime change, since it clear to anyone with any knowledge of the recent history of Iraq, that he did in fact know that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction.
He now really needs to explain why he misled the British public as to his reasons for going to war; why, given the general opposition to war in the United Kingdom, he felt his own feelings should count for more than the democratic will of the people; and, above all, how a man who parades his Christianity and his communion with God as a reason for his actions, can justify a decision that led to the death of 100,000 civilians. The most charitable explanation, and one given increased credibility by his acceptance of a role as peace-maker in the Middle East, is that he is mentally unhinged, his mind corrupted by power that he was never equipped or fit to exercise.
