The war in Iraq had no base whatsoever. Michael Moore, a socialist weasel he might be, but he raised a fair point in "Farenheit 9/11" - Iraq was a sovereign nation before the war. It was a sovereign nation that had never attacked the USA, killed a US Citizen outside the bounds of war, or threatened to attack the USA. There have been no proven links with Al-Qaieda and there were no weapons of mass destruction. I'm not saying that it was all peachy and lovely over there, but I think it's pretty much a fact that the USA and Britain along with their allies had no right to march in and change things. If we're talking about removing bad regimes, then the armies of the west should be preparing to march against all the other similar regimes around the world. Why doesn't Tony Blair move against Mugabe? I look at Michal Moore's work with greater suspicion these days, but there are some undoubtedly striking things in "Farenheit 9/11" - For example when they showed the clips of Colin Powell demonstrating Saddams awesome capabilities in WMDs and Chemical Weapons, and then straight after Condoleeza Rice saying (only 2 years previous) - 'His armed forces have not been rebuilt' - 'He had no WMDs' - 'WE ARE ABLE TO KEEP WEAPONS FROM HIM'. That was pretty striking in my mind.
To cut the ramble short - the poster is right on the matter of the Iraq war - it was an unforgiveable and nonsensical act carried out by men who have forsaken all principle for the sake of oil. Before the war I was an avid supporter of Tony Blair but now I'm not sure. I was glad to see Labour re-elected but I was also glad that Blair's career in charge is coming to an end, even if we have to wait a while longer. All those soldiers left over there fighting a fight they never should have to have become invoved in, those people who went over there to help rebuild and have been murdered, and all those innocent civilians killed. History will remember this war as an act of western aggression, not as any crusade against terror.