No advance of Iraq if UK had well known Saddam had no WMD

BRITAIN would not have invaded Iraq in 2003 if it had been transparent that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass drop (WMD), Foreign Secretary David Miliband claimed yesterday. Mr Miliband pronounced there would have been no United Nations Security Council resolutions and no opinion in the House of Commons "if we had well well well well well well well known afterwards what we know now".His on all sides appears to strife with comments done by then-prime apportion Tony Blair, ADVERTISEMENTwho pronounced last year he would "still have thought it right" to remove Saddam if he had well well well well well well well known there were no WMD in the country.And last month Gordon Brown, who was Chancellor at the time of the invasion, told the Iraq War Inquiry that the main issue for him was that Iraq was already in long-term crack of UN resolutions.Mr Miliband done the comments during a radio discuss on unfamiliar affairs and defence.Asked if he would still have upheld the advance of Iraq if he had well well well well well well well known afterwards what was well well well well well well well known now, Mr Miliband replied: "Obviously there would have been no such decision. "If we had well well well well well well well known afterwards what we know now, if we"d have well well well well well well well known that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, there would have been no UN resolutions and no opinion in the House of Commons."In a TV talk with Fern Britton last year, Mr Blair pronounced alternative reasons would have been indispensable to clear stealing Saddam if it had been well well well well well well well known that Iraq had no WMD.Mr Brown, giving justification to the exploration in March, pronounced it had been the "right decision" to overpower Saddam, who he pronounced had been a "serial violator" of general law.