George W. Bush and Tony Blair agreed to military intervention in Iraq in the spring of 2002. The military intervention was launched and the world has seen the results. Part of the justification for the intervention was on so-called humanitarian and values groups that Saddam was a new Hitler oppressing his people and had weapons of mass destruction. As similar line was used by the Obama administration that Assad is Hitler and so forth.
So let's not forget the Blair doctrine for global intervention based on "values" and humanitarian concerns. The Chicago Tribune covered his speech on this topic to an audience in Chicago marking the 50th anniversary of NATO:
..."Setting forth a new foreign policy framework for a post-Cold War world, British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Thursday unveiled a bold international doctrine to justify Western military intervention against renegade regimes such as those in Iraq and Yugoslavia.
In a major address to the Economic Club of Chicago, Blair proposed a new set of guidelines for military action that stress Western humanitarian values in a world shorn of the certainties of the Cold War confrontation between the Western democracies and the Soviet bloc.
The British leader outlined five principles that he suggested seek to reconcile the traditional practice of non-interference in a sovereign state's internal affairs with the need to stop widespread abuses by a government of its own citizens.
"We may be tempted to think back to the clarity and simplicity of the Cold War," he told his audience of 1,400 business and financial leaders, academics and local officials at the Hilton Hotel and Towers. "But now we have to establish a new framework."
Blair's remarks came on the eve of a historic NATO summit in Washington originally meant to celebrate the alliance's 50th anniversary but now clouded by the conflict in Kosovo and mounting questions about the alliance's military performance and political cohesion. Blair delivered his speech after meeting privately with President Clinton in Washington, suggesting some degree of coordination between the two allies.
Labeling his approach a "Doctrine of International Community," Blair also proposed a set of new international rules to ease the world into the 21st Century. He called for an overhaul of the world financial system and a drive toward free trade. He also argued for a more efficient United Nations, organizational changes in NATO, better cooperation on the environment and a re-examination of Third World debt.
As the NATO leaders prepared to address the Kosovo problem during their summit in Washington, Blair said that on some occasions, human rights are more important than national sovereignty.
"Non-interference has long been considered an important principle of international order. And I do not suggest we jettison it lightly," he said. "One state should not feel it has the right to change the political system of another or foment subversion or seize pieces of territory to which it feels it should have some claim. But the principle of non-interference must be qualified in important respects.
"Acts of genocide can never be a purely internal matter," Blair said, citing the Serbs' forced expulsion of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo and white minority rule in South Africa as examples of threats to international security.
Asserting that the most pressing foreign policy problem governments face is to identify the circumstances justifying active involvement in other people's conflicts, Blair outlined five major conditions that should be satisfied when confronting dictatorships such as those of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.
"First, are we sure of our case?" Blair said, asserting there was no doubt that NATO's current military action in Kosovo is justified.
"Second, have we exhausted all diplomatic options? We should give peace every chance. We did, indeed, in Kosovo," he said.
"Third, on the basis of a practical assessment of the situation, are there military operations we can sensibly and prudently undertake?"
Fourth, Blair said, those proposing intervention must be prepared to endure for "the long term." The final condition was whether national interests were involved.
While stressing that the five points were not absolute tests, he said they were the kind of issues "we need to start thinking about in order to develop the proper principles that will govern our actions in future years."
No longer were the existence of world democracies as states under threat, Blair said.
"Now our actions are guided by a more subtle blend of mutual self-interest and moral purpose in defending the values we cherish," he said. "In the end, values and interests merge.
"If we can establish and spread the values of liberty, the rule of law, human rights and an open society, then that is in our national interests too. As John Kennedy put it, `Freedom is indivisible and when one man is enslaved, who is free?' " ....