Chilcot delivers crushing verdict on Blair and the Iraq war

[muriel_volestrangler]

Source: The Guardian

Sir John Chilcot has delivered a devastating critique of Tony Blair’s decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003, with his long-awaited report concluding that Britain chose to join the US invasion before “peaceful options for disarmament” had been exhausted.

The head of the Iraq war inquiry said the UK’s decision to attack and occupy a sovereign state for the first time since the second world war was a decision of “utmost gravity”. He described Iraq’s president, Saddam Hussein, as “undoubtedly a brutal dictator” who had repressed his own people and attacked his neighbours.

But Chilcot – whom Gordon Brown asked seven years ago to head an inquiry into the conflict - was withering about Blair’s choice to join the US invasion. Chilcot said: “We have concluded that the UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted. Military action at that time was not a last resort.”

The report suggests that Blair’s self-belief was a major factor in the decision to go to war. In a section headed Lessons, Chilcot writes: “When the potential for military action arises, the government should not commit to a firm political objective before it is clear it can be achieved. Regular reassessment is essential.”



Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/06/chilcot-report-crushing-verdict-tony-blair-iraq-war

---

More at the link, plus live coverage here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-36714717

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2016/jul/06/chilcot-report-live-inquiry-war-iraq

[underpants]

1. Brutal

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. "There is one terrorist that the world needs to be aware of and that person is Tony Blair"

That was said by the sister of a British soldier killed in Iraq, at the press conference held by the families of the dead British soldiers. It got a big round of applause.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-36714717

The families say that it is possible they will take some form of legal action, but need to examine the report in detail, not just the summary. Legal analyst Joshua Rozenberg examines the case for legal action: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/06/iraq-war-inquiry-chilcot-tony-blair-prosecute

[Denzil_DC]

4. Two full-day parliamentary debates

scheduled for next week, Cameron's just announced.

He's just rubbished the claim that "Saddam had WMD" by 2003 and invoked Robin Cook (RIP). He's not buying that the Blair cabinet influenced the intelligence community, but criticizes the presentation of intelligence to the public without emphasizing the uncertainty.

On legality, he pointed out that judgment isn't within the remit of Chilcot, but leaves it open for debate as military action wasn't a measure of last resort and accepts Chilcot's criticism of decision-making processes, lack of record-keeping and the rush to war and lack of exit strategy. But he seems to accept Chilcot's finding that there was no evidence of a deliberate attempt to deceive the public.

[OwlinAZ]

5. What does this imply about the U.S.?

crickets

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. It's 8:30 in the morning there, isn't it?

Give people a chance to get to work.

[Cosmocat]

9. Why would this country give a care about Iraq

Which cost this country trillions of dollars, the lives of thousands of brave troops, the lives torn apart for 10s of thousands of brave troops, the middle east completely jacked up ...

Why would this country give the first flying fuck about the assholes who cravenly lied us into that, when they can delve into full outrage mode over a SOC doing the same thing every prior SOC did and an exhaustive investigation has shown no evidence of the loss of classified material?

[jpak]

7. So - is Poodle Blair going to the Tower for this?

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. There's no chance of a government prosecution

but the families of the killed British soldiers are still deciding whether to take legal action, pointing out sections such as the way that the basis for which its legality was decided was “wholly unsatisfactory” (basically, the Attorney General had first said a 2nd UN amendment was necessary, but when it wasn't going to appear, Blair "undermined the authority of the Security Council" (Chilcot's conclusion) and leaned on the AG to change his opinion. He did, and gave the cabinet the new one without explanation (and the cabinet, to its shame, didn't asked why he'd done a U turn).

I think that Chilcot pointing out that Blair was explicitly warned an invasion would make terrorism worse, but claimed in public that one of the dangers of Saddam was that he might arm terrorists with WMD, could also be significant - it's one of the cases where Blair didn't just pick the intelligence or analysis most favourable to war, but actively misled people about the dangers. Since most of the British soldiers died in terrorist attacks in the years after, that might give them a case he bears responsibility.

[choie]

10. Must be nice to have a government

That is somewhat accountable. We should try it sometime...

[mitty14u2]

11. This is missing Main Street Media Recorded Program

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07lmm08

PDF Download http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/246416/the-report-of-the-iraq-inquiry_executive-summary.pdf

[lonestarnot]

12. Poodle's day is coming.