Foreign Secretary Beckett was asked by BBC's Andrew Marr this morning if, with the benefit of hindsight and knowing all that the government now knows about Iraq, would they still have invaded in 2003. She answers with an unequivocal 'Yes'. Am I being obtuse here but was the invasion designed to counter a threat of deployed WMD, allegedly deployable within 45 minutes, or not? Did the govt not make great play of the 'searching for a diplomatic solution' scenario in Jan and Feb 03. Were they really ? B*ll*cks were they. Because if the government knew then what they know now, that there was no WMD, why would they want to invade unless there was some other and longer held purpose. Like backing that half wit in the Whitehouse. 3000 US deaths, over 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths and over 100 British Armed Forces dead ... and she would do it all again. This is how much our government cares about us in the Armed Forces The obvious inability of this government to learn from and accepts its mistakes (Iraq, Immigration, Prescott, 7/7 [nothing to do with Iraq according to PM], Spin etc etc) scares the hell out of me. What a bunch of w*n*e*s.