Let's be honest, if at the end of today Blair's worst sins are found to be overegging the 45 minute claim and lying to Fern Britton then the former PM will have hit the Chilcot inquiry equivalent of a home run.
Many people no longer like Tony, the man who won 3 elections, and it's hard not to find reasons why. Raking in millions after leading the Labour party for so long must stick in the craw for existing members and Iain McWhirter has already stunningly outlined how Blair left his party in ruin when he jumped ship.
On Iraq, as this inquiry continues to fruitlessly jab away, at some point one has to stop trying to nail a jellyfish to the wall and conclude they have a stinging point to make. Lots of them.
SNP Tax
6 minutes ago
10 comments:
I think he made a very significant error when he said "The primary consideration for me was to send an absolutely powerful, clear and unremitting message that after September 11th, if you were a regime engaged in WMD (weapons of mass destruction), you had to stop."
Planes are not weapons of mass destruction. Al Q were not a regime just a loose band of terrorist who got incredibly ''lucky'' with the 9/11 outcome (from their point of view). Iraq was the bulwark against Al Q in the region. As a strategy it makes no sense, as the invasion of Iraq has led to its becoming the most terrorist infested country in the world.
What I am a bit worried about is that people might focus to much on the detail, and not focus on the fact that the central point of his argument appears to be mince.
There are absolutely no links between Iraq and 9/11, indeed one of the groups that Saddam's Bathists Arabs persecuted were the Jihadists.
Blair has confirmed what we all knew.
I'm just catching up with the rest of it, he seems to be trying to conflate a large number of middle eastern issues here. They are not directly relevant.
Smoke and mirrors in the desert methinks, in the hope of drawing attention away from the salient facts and playing on an us and them mentality.
Yes it was a masterclass in sophistry and spin. However, he was clearly nervous to begin with. Its a pity that the panel did not have someone who was aggressive with teeth. Apart from ex-diplomat Sir Roderic Lyne the rest of the Chilcot panel are pretty toothless.
Yes they were pretty rubbish Strathturret, they gave Straw a much harder time. Potential whipping boy I think.
This is the most astonishing thing I have read so far;
"It wasn’t that objectively he had done more," he said of the Iraqi leader. "It was that our perception of the risk had shifted."
Eh? Even as a faux excuse that is stunningly illogical if he is using 9/11 as the basis for the risk assessment.
Let's face it boys and girls, it's a matter of opinion. He didn't do anythign wrong.
He did things that with hindsight, he'd do differently, but all in all, he did what he thought was best with the information he was presented with. Shout "murderer" and "liar" and "spin" all you want, but if there was something to pin on him, it would have happened a long time ago.
The boy done good, both yesterday and in his role as PM.
True, but Blair still introduced 2 new arguments to the table, Iran and what I call the Minority Report argument, ie what Iraq might be capable of. Doesnt really change anyones opinion, but does draw subtle lines between the British approch anth the American approch to the percieved Iraq problem.
http://humbug3.blogspot.com/
"Let's be honest, if at the end of today Blair's worst sins are found to be overegging the 45 minute claim and lying to Fern Britton then the former PM will have hit the Chilcot inquiry equivalent of a home run."
No, no Jeff. The suspicion is not that he lied to Fern Britton but that he didn't lie to her.
And 'over-egging' the 45 minute claim may have been the crucial difference between parliamentary support for the invasion or not.
A home run? I'm beginning to wonder about you Jeff ;)
Voiceofourown, my point with the "home run" comment was that so many people had set the expectation that Blair was going to be verbally hung, drawn and quartered by this inquiry but he escaped with very, very little damage indeed.
I'm no legal expert and don't claim to understand the many complicated intricacies of the Iraq debate but to me that suggests either (1) the inquireres weren't up to scratch in pinning Blair down (which I find very hard to believe) or (2) Blair actually had a point and some justification for his decisions and we should give the guy a break.
It is all about perception Political Dissuasion and the perception is that he got it wrong even though he keeps saying that he believed he did the right thing. Maybe he does believe he did the right thing. So what? Most people now believe it was the wrong thing.
I don't know how anybody can possibly think he has escaped without being damaged. He hasn't been damaged particularly by the Chilcot Enquiry - he has been damaged by the whole thing.
He's not going to go to jail of course but he will be forever remembered by most British people as the man who lied to take the country to war. He tried to tell them it was about defending the UK when it was about bringing about regime change in Iraq. He will never be forgiven for that - not least by the Labour Party I imagine, who have been damned with him
Post a Comment