I think you refer to the weapons supplied to Iraq by the US. Gas and chemicals, yes? None were found after all of those Iraqi civilians were killed by the invading troops so what was that invasion really all about? No weapons probably means no intelligence reports to say that there were.
Bush and Bliar both justified the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it had weapons of mass destruction. It was a lie. They blamed false intelligence but that was a lie too. A British intelligence officer who blew the whistle on the WMD lie mysteriously died whilst walking his dog one day.
And how would any private individual get the evidence? Walk into MI6 or the CIA and ask to borrow the files? Perhaps not, eh? That's why AI want a body with some power to initiate proceedings. I think that there is enough doubt about what those two and their sidekicks who profited from the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan did to warrant an independent hearing or trial.
Considering all of the lives that have been lost, including those of Western troops, the changing stories about the reasons for doing it and the lack of any result of the types sought, something need to be looked into for sure. All that's happened politically in those countries is that one bunch of tribesmen has been replaced by another, at great cost to us. Not a great result.
