BARONESS SYMONS OF VERNHAM DEAN
Labour, Minister of State for Trade and Investment and deputy leader of the Lords:
"We do not want war, indeed it is a terrible thing to contemplate. But the time will soon be upon us all when Saddam Hussein rejects the wishes of the international community and instead chooses fear, violence, terrorism and dictatorship and, as a result, we shall have to make our choice, choosing determination, democracy and the cause of securing peace. That is the best way forward but we have to be ready, if peaceful disarmament proves impossible in the face of Saddam's obstinacy, to take action to secure it."
LORD HOWELL OF GUILDFORD
Conservative spokesman for foreign affairs in the Lords:
"I think for anyone with the slightest sense of history, it is impossible not to appreciate at this particular moment, indeed admire, the tireless determination, the lonely valour, of Tony Blair. The Prime Minister has slightly confusingly swung about in making the case for military action ... [but] at least he has not tried to ride the tiger of populism, which is very dangerous and nearly always ends in tears. But it's right to remind our French and German friends, as well as some political parties nearer home, of that danger. Since 11 September there have already been four absolutely major threats of terrorism against sites in this country, each mercifully and successfully thwarted."
BARONESS RAMSAY OF CARTVALE
Labour, former Lords spokeswoman on foreign affairs and former deputy head of MI6:
"I think the idea that the policy of containment is an answer ignores history. Containment has most certainly not been working. Although it has had its successes in its time, neither the inspectors nor sanctions were inhibiting the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction by this regime. And does anyone doubt that only the credible threat of force has achieved the return of the UN inspectors?
"Resolution 1441 demands full co-operation from Iraq and is a final chance which the regime is patently not taking. I really have problems understanding how anyone can have doubts about international law being breached by military action against Iraq. Chapter seven specifically allows the use of force and Saddam has failed to comply with 23 separate obligations and a series of resolutions under chapter seven.
"The stark choice is Saddam's: disarm now or be disarmed. Containment most certainly has not been working and although it has had its successes in its time, neither the inspectors nor inspections were inhibiting the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction by this regime."
LORD BRAMALL
Crossbencher, former Chief of the Defence Staff
"I do think it is very important that everyone is quite clear what we are likely to be letting ourselves in for if we went down the military path. When land forces are deployed to battle positions, as ours shortly will be, it becomes difficult to reverse the process. And having so openly supported the Americans on the possible need for military action, the Prime Minister can hardly withdraw that support now. Even with all the American military power and high technology, getting into Iraq to implement the political aim was always going to be easier than handling what you did when you got there, and being able to extricate yourself after the battle was over.
"Winston Churchill once wrote: 'Never, never, never believe that any war will be smooth and easy.' It must be recognised that such largely American military action would constitute, whether intended or not, a massive piece of imperial policing in an area where it is probably less, not more, Western intervention which is needed. Any satisfactory rearrangement of Iraq is probably going to require a quite lengthy occupation. The Prime Minister and ministers must do more to get the nation's support. It is essential for men and women in the armed forces.
"Before going into battle they do need to know the public are behind them. If war cannot be averted, at least military operations will be conducted as quickly and intelligently as possible, and by this I mean 14 days of land battle at the outside. Otherwise we are in deep trouble. If anything goes wrong I do have to say that very serious questions will undoubtedly be asked why the Government, with the Opposition in its wake, went down this road in the first place, instead of continued containment of Iraq and concentrating on the more imminent threat posed by al-Qa'ida and other terrorist organisations."
LORD BRUCE OF DONINGTON
Labour, former Lords spokesman on foreign affairs and former deputy head of MI6
"I do not believe in war because I think that it's one of the most immoral acts that organised society can perpetrate. We talk of collateral damage in the event of any war. I wonder if you really understand what is meant by collateral damage? They are going to be blown up and torn up; men, women and children. One of the cardinal tenets of my party is the wickedness of war. War is an evil thing. It is not a thing to be brushed over, it is not something to be set aside. It is a terrible thing and has terrible consequences for the individuals concerned. If we should go to war, we should be implicitly ending the whole political structure of the world itself. We shall be destroying that civil structure; we shall be substituting it with the power and authority of one state: the United States, who will thereafter be conducting the affairs in general of mankind."
THE RT REV RICHARD HARRIES
The Bishop of Oxford
"The United Nations exists to be a focus for, and an expression of, a truly international consensus. When the right course of action is fiercely contested, as it is at the moment, it is that much more important to ensure that there is the widest possible international support and authority. If there is a fresh resolution of the Security Council, recognising the end of the road has been reached and designed to get Saddam Hussein to comply with UN resolutions by peaceful means and authorising the use of military force, then those of us who have been sceptical about whether other criteria have been met will need to think again. However, in the absence of such a resolution, that scepticism will remain. Even if there are grounds for war on the basis of present resolutions, and even if unilateral action is sometimes morally right, and I believe it to have been over Kosovo, in the present situation it is imperative to obtain a fresh mandate if force is to be used."
LORD GILMOUR OF CRAIGMILLAR
Conservative, former Secretary of State for Defence
"The Prime Minister claimed in Glasgow that unpopularity is the price of leadership. Mr Blair has been unpopular not because he has been leading, but because he has been following President Bush. During the last century, the US was undoubtedly a considerable force for good, but it would be difficult to argue that the current administration in Washington is now a force for good and that is why it is so generally unpopular throughout much of the world. This will be a cynical war because the reasons given for it are largely bogus. The idea that Saddam Hussein presents an imminent threat to this country or the United States is deeply implausible. Another reason given for the war the alleged connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden is even more bogus. There is no evidence at all of this. When the Prime Minister says we are making a final push for peace, he means he is making a final push for war."
THE RT REV JOHN GLADWIN
The Bishop of Guildford:
"There is no escape from the public and clear commitment to resolving the issue of the Palestinian situation in relation to Israel."
BARONESS WILLIAMS OF CROSBY
Liberal Democrat
"Let me say very clearly in case there is any misunderstanding, that we believe we have an obligation to our troops as powerful as any other part of this House. In our view the first obligation is to make absolutely certain that men and women are not put into war, risking their lives, unless it can be shown to be absolutely necessary to do so.
"I have the greatest respect for the Prime Minister, I think he has virtually ripped himself into pieces to try to hold the US administration to the United Nations process ... but it is not the Prime Minister who is in the driving seat and it is concern about who is in the driving seat that underlines much of the scepticism today."
LORD HOWE OF ABERAVON
Conservative
"How has it come about that the United Nations and Nato are facing such desperately serious problems: under threat of disintegration, with leading democracies almost at each others' throats as they try to grapple with this problem? It is not due to any inherent weakness or stupidity on the part of some of our allies, it is because we have not yet been able to reach a conclusion on how to tackle this matter. We were able to do so in the face of challenges of much greater gravity than that which is posed by this tiny state in the Middle East, with the gross domestic product less than that of Essex which has been twice defeated in the last 20 years. Yet it has managed to throw us into this hideous turmoil. Have we yet reached the point of taking the final decision?"
LORD THOMSON OF MONIFIETH
Liberal Democrat
"The American and British governments are getting their priorities confused in dealing with the twin evils of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. The horrors of Saddam are well known. There is always a danger that decent men draw the wrong message from the wrong historic experiences. In 1956, at the time of Suez, Anthony Eden equated Nasser with Hitler and was only rescued from a foolish war by the United States. Today, sadly, the leaders of both America and Britain appear to be falling into the same historic fallacy over Saddam Hussein. Saddam for all his horrors is no Hitler, he poses no immediate threat to the security of either the United States or the United Kingdom. He's not a global threat. But Osama bin Laden and al-Qa'ida are such a threat."
Lords debate: 'We must choose democracy and the cause of securing peace'
