Latest Bliar Revelations
 

Thanks to the release of Hillary Clinton's stuff it is now abundantly clear that Bliar took this country to war for the benefit of another state without proper process and arguably deceived his people - how do you think this will affect the morale of our forces in the middle east?

Probably won't affect morale too much as it's probably not too much of a surprise by now!

Sorry if I'm being dumb Walter,

Is the 'We' the ADF or the UK forces?

I know that 'our' morale is pretty good, but Lions led by donkeys is not the preserve of only the UK.

Walter we have locked horns on one or two occasions but on this one i agree.

Tony Blair led the UK into GW2 based on a fraudulent document full of lies and deception. That document was one of main reasons I left the RAF.

Blair is a war criminal and he should be tried as such.

Flame all you want but you can't just make up things to go and re-attack another sovereign nation and Blair it has become clear knew that document in the main was a lie.

totally in Bush's pocket even before 9/11

ever read Robt Harris's "The Ghost"? The question is asked of a fictional ex UK PM who is hiding in the USA avoiding the Int'l Criminal COurt:-

"name one thing he did that was against the interests of the United States?"

I think everything Bliar did in the ME was against the interests of the USA. The problem is that not many Americans can see that, although more of them might be coming to understand it now that the area is in a far worse state than it was before.

If he's nice, perhaps Julian Assange will give him a few hints . . .

I agree................... :{:{:{

I was led to understand (during my military training) that it was a war crime to attack any state in order to force a regime change. I extremely glad I had already taken my option to leave the services by the time this all kicked off. I have said for years that Blair should be taken to court over this.

In his own mind, he seems to believe that being appointed "Middle East special peace envoy" or whatever ridiculous title he subsequently held was enough salvation for him.

And don't forget GQ magazine's magnificent display of irony* with him being named as their "Philanthropist of the Year 2014"...



(* or at least, that's what I hope it was)

Meanwhile Chilcott stands firm.

Some of you clearly can't read, this was the walts question

answer - they won't give a rats.

longer answer - they will be way more concerned with about a gazillion other things.

dump **** ing question and some even dumber *****ing answers.

From what i remember, most people in the armed forces seemed to relish going to war against Iraq. They didn't want to hear the truth.

Sending your own folk to fight wars and die for a lie is beyond comprehension. Blair, Hoon, Straw, Mandelson, the spin doctor prick et al should have been put away many years ago.

The only one with any dignity and conscience sadly died, Robin Cook was it??

Remember that enforcing the no-fly zone had been sucking enthusiasm for 12 years prior to GW2. Going to war promised to end that and return to a hoped for peace dividend.

Small hope as it turned out with as long in an even worse SH in Afg.

The world wars - 1914-45 lasted over 30 years. The Cold War 1947-91 lasted 34. The present wars 1990-2015 have lasted . . . well they show no signs of ending any time soon.

In proper historical context GW1 was actually just the Battle for Kuwait. GW2 the Battle for Iraq followed by the rather less well defined Battle of Afg.

PN:

Indeed, GW 1 only had a mandate for the liberation of Kuwait from the UNSC. A clear and defined goal, unlike what happened in both GW 2 and Afghanistan. But we were dealing with a totally different generation of politicians, mainly one who had a degree of honour unlike the present and recent past generation.

GW1 yes, we had a clear directive, Iraq had invaded another Nation and the directive was to remove them. I can't remember anybody I served with at the time complaining.

GW2 No, Lots of people I continued to server with complained, before, during and after, and I include Senior Ranks on the Station I was serving on at the time.

I can't recall many "relishing" the fact they were going to war on either occasion.

Claire Short also resigned from the cabinet; and not all members of the military were in a hurry to invade Iraq. However, they did what was asked of them by an elected government- that's what being in the military entails.

So glad I was out before this one.

GW 1 was totally justified.

GW 2 was not.

I'd have rather taken a spell in Colchester prison than assist in it.

Just to repeat, in AFG, we went in with HMG expecting us to be welcomed with open arms and not fire a shot - b*ll*cks - but at least we were invited in by their Government.

Like the Russians had been invited in previously?

I still wonder whether, if the hawks in Washington hadn't allowed themselves to get distracted with Iraq, we could have accomplished more, and more quickly, in Afghanistan.

Perhaps the history of that place tells us it wouldn't have mattered, but we'll never know.