# Bush wanted to provoke Saddam by disguising US spyplanes in UN colours **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 3, 2006, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812 "2006-02-03T10:46:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/21 "2006-02-03T14:56:45Z")
Blair still being in power. Some of this info isn’t new as Woodward covered some of it in his book _Plan of Attack_. Blair clearly has been shown to have agreed to go to war with Bush with or without a UN resolution while at home he was telling everyone that no decision was made and they needed a UN resolution. Blair’s legal advise at that time was that the UK needed a Resolution to remain lawful. That changed when the resolution didn’t happen. Blair out and out lied to the electorate and to parliament before the vote. It is a disgrace IMO that he remains in power. I say this as a person who if living in the UK would have been a Labour voter and Blair supporter. Blair based all the pre-war build up on the WMD. He said Saddam could remain if the WMD’s were sorted out. This was clearly bullshit. > [@](#): > > Some extracts from the memo > > President Bush to Tony Blair: “The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach” > > Bush: “It was also possible that a defector could be brought out who would give a public presentation about Saddam’s WMD, and there was also a small possibility that Saddam would be assassinated.” > Blair: "A second Security Council Resolution resolution would provide an insurance policy against the unexpected and international cover, including with the Arabs. " > > Bush: "The US would put its full weight behind efforts to get another resolution and would ‘twist arms’ and ‘even threaten’. But he had to say that if ultimately we failed, military action would follow anyway.’’ > > Blair responds that he is: “solidly with the President and ready to do whatever it took to disarm Saddam.” > > Bush told Blair he: “thought it unlikely that there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups.” [http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1656](http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1656) ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/22 "2006-02-03T14:58:11Z")
Sorry the first sentence should read “Blair still being in power blows me away” ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/23 "2006-02-03T15:05:13Z")
> [@yojimbo](#): > > Sorry the first sentence should read “Blair still being in power blows me away” I agree with you. I voted Labour (we vote for local representatives not PM’s and in my constituency the only winner was ever going to be the Conservative candidate) on the expectation Labour would get rid of him pretty quickly. I won’t vote for them next time. This thread should probably have been in the Pit. i’m just outraged that wither would countenance starting a war under cover of the UN flag. That’s like smuggling arms in Red Cross ambulances. Then I got pissed with people denying the sky is blue. ---
**Author:** ![Pope\_Bob\_The\_Pious](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/97f17d/32.png) [@Pope\_Bob\_The\_Pious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pope_Bob_The_Pious)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/24 "2006-02-03T20:02:25Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > From Colin Powell’s UN presentation - scroll dpwn to see Slide 17. a U2 in UN livery… A tail ID does not livery make. [Here is an example](http://www.warblogging.com/illustrations/un.helicopter.mi.26.jpg) of a aircraft in UN colors. Notice its color: White. > [@](#): > > So unless you’re arguing that c4 and Sands (who produced the infamous Downing Street memo) are liars then this plan was considered by Bush. There cannot possibly be a middle ground? Could not Mr.Sands simply be mistaken? ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/25 "2006-02-03T20:23:22Z")
> [@Pope Bob The Pious](#): > > A tail ID does not livery make. The hell? Dude, it’s not like the U-2 was going to become UN property. We were loaning them control of the aircraft’s tasking assignments. As you stated, it’s still USAF property. Maybe they didn’t feel like repainting the whole damn thing. Maybe you can’t paint a U-2 white. Either way, I assure you that painting a big “UN” on the tail is certainly sufficient to identify the thing as a UN-tasked plane. After all, an F-14 is not identified as US Navy because it’s gray, it’s US Navy because it has “US Navy” painted on it. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/26 "2006-02-04T02:02:47Z")
> [@DWMarch](#): > > While I’m certainly not one to jump up and defend George W. Bush or the Iraq war, something about this story is setting off my BS detector. Spy planes don’t fly “colors.” American ones do, as it happens. I read a book on the Skunk Works, and it mentioned the troubles they had due to a bureaucratic insistance that US planes _must_ have a US flag. They had to develop a new type of paint just for the purpose. This is in referance to the SR-71 Blackbird, not the U-2, but I assume the same rules would apply ( especially because it would be easier on a U-2). ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2006, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812/27 "2006-02-06T09:32:41Z")
> [@Pope Bob The Pious](#): > > A tail ID does not livery make. > > [Here is an example](http://www.warblogging.com/illustrations/un.helicopter.mi.26.jpg) of a aircraft in UN colors. Notice its color: White. > > There cannot possibly be a middle ground? Could not Mr.Sands simply be mistaken? No - he could not, seeing as the memo of the meeting exists. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wanted-to-provoke-saddam-by-disguising-us-spyplanes-in-un-colours/342812.md?page=1)