FINALLY HE ADMITS THAT HE IS A WAR CRIMINAL!

[Wiz]

FINALLY HE ADMITS THAT
HE IS A WAR CRIMINAL!

For 12 years until his carefully choreographed interview with CNN, reported in today’s Mail on Sunday, Mr Blair had presented himself as the innocent victim of bad intelligence who at least made the world a safer place by toppling Saddam Hussein.

Nor until now has he ever admitted his policies have put people in Britain at risk.

In the undeniably cosy chat on CNN, when the subject of the most brutal terrorist threat yet in post-Saddam Iraq came up, he let slip the following:

‘Of course, you can’t say that those of us who removed Saddam in 2003 bear no responsibility for the situation in 2015.’

That double-negative is the nearest Blair has ever come to admitting he helped fuel the flames now licking at Britain’s doorstep. What is now clear – not least from another report in today’s Mail on Sunday – is that Islamic State is not only an immediate threat to millions in Iraq and Syria, but that jihadi terrorists are burrowing away inside Britain.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3288189/Damn-Tony-Blair-Iraq-ISIS-Fear-abroad-home-sins-hugely-respected-writer-issues-simple-devastating-verdict-former-PM.html

[leslied]

Wiz,

Any thoughtful person has known this for more than a decade.  Only now when there is little impact to making this admission has he done so.  His position as a middle east mediator was a bad joke...

[msmoby]

Wiz,

Any thoughtful person has known this for more than a decade.  Only now when there is little impact to making this admission has he done so.  His position as a middle east mediator was a bad joke...

Any truly thoughtful person will also know that Blair held Bush off attacking earlier and that he based his support on intelligence that was dubious - with hindsight.

I am no fan of Blair, but his is quite correct in reminding us that Saddam was still boasting he had WMD and Hans Blix was suggesting to Saddam that such pronouncements - in conjunction with other threats to neighbouring nations and past military stunts - were likely to illicit a response.

He is also quite correct in pointing out that IF Saddam had remained in power - and who knows what conflicts he would have started and what hell the Iraqis would have endured - we would have another Syria on our hands, now.

[Maxx]

I see things from an American perspective. Donald Trump raised this issue that it was a never a good idea to topple Saddam. The Republican response, namely the Bush's, is react in a most uncomfortable way. We can see the same on this board with the neocon leaners inability to see cause and effect. For me the best example of that was the toppling of Qadaffi, a year later the death of the ambassador Stevens followed a few year later by the boat people flooding into Italy. What can be more clear than that? When will these people (the neocons) ever learn that actions have consequences?

[Maxx]

Wiz,

who knows what conflicts he would have started and what hell the Iraqis would have endured - we would have another Syria on our hands, now.

I tend to believe it would be less of a problem that what we have right now. Saddam fought Iran and invaded Kuwait at our veiled suggestion.



I do not see him as someone who was bent on conquest but rather dealing with his neighbors who were disrespecting him.

[Wiz]

Wiz,

Any thoughtful person has known this for more than a decade.  Only now when there is little impact to making this admission has he done so.  His position as a middle east mediator was a bad joke...

Any truly thoughtful person will also know that Blair held Bush off attacking earlier and that he based his support on intelligence that was dubious - with hindsight.

... and who knows what conflicts he would have started and what hell the Iraqis would have endured - we would have another Syria on our hands, now.

MAXX
Be carefull with the QUOTATIONS .... in your post,  as they give different meaning to who said what! .... I just fix it to read correctly 

BACK ON TOPIC.

I remember back in August 2015, reading about the delayed Chilcot Enquiry, and my guess is that BLAIR is pre-empting its findings!

The inquiry began in 2009, and the hearings completed in 2011, but it had repeated delays. In my view they try to cook its findings and cover the then Government from any difficult developments.

Obviously Blair will bear the brunt of the report’s criticism and it would suit the former prime minister to see a wide range of targets blamed when it is published ….. so he is acting early …. because, I think many people that were involved … have also received the draft copy of its findings.

I guess also Cameron is worried of what may come out about his own actions in bombing f Libya!

Let’s not forget that many people from the Government were involved, including Sir Richard Dearlove, then head of MI6, Sir John Scarlett, chairman of the joint intelligence committee, Geoff Hoon, the defence secretary, Clare Short, the international development secretary, and senior officials in the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Foreign Office and the Cabinet Office.

May I remind you that the HARD evidence of the 1st Dossier that “Alistair Campbell” published, was a copy of an Iraqi student’s “Dissertation” for his Diploma at his Californian University.

May I also remind you that the most important official British inspector, Dr Kelly, has “committed …. ” suicide under a Tree and then the BBC reporter, who announced his comments, (of the night before,) …. that were lies the reasons given of “the 30 min deployment of WMD”, by the Government for the invasion,  on Radio 4 at 7 AM GMT … lost his job because of that!

Never mind the usual Trolls and apologists of the Neocons, tell us, BLACK IS WHITE.. & so on.

Watch this video and have a laugh with the American Neocon!

The fact remains the so called "WAR ON TERROR" of the 2 war criminals, Bliar and Bush has created the current situation and millions of innocent people lost their lives!

I agree with the comments in DM article:

"From Afghanistan in 2001 via Iraq and Libya, our rulers have failed to ask what comes next – and then feign innocent surprise when it’s chaos.

One truth that Blair likes to repeat is how interconnected the world has become.

But by creating conditions for the growth of global jihadi terrorism, his legacy has left us at home and the world at large in a daily more dangerous place.

Damn you, Tony Blair" ..  and of course G.W Bush.

 

[msmoby]

For me the best example of that was the toppling of Qadaffi, a year later the death of the ambassador Stevens followed a few year later by the boat people flooding into Italy. What can be more clear than that? When will these people (the neocons) ever learn that actions have consequences?

Maxx

If you had chosen Libya in 2011 to relocate to - Benghazi - and seen the way the regime treated the people - forbidding them from using a new hospital  - because the city was 'naughty' and needed a 'lesson' - you'd realise that Gadaffi was on the slippery slope to revolution.

When  Benghazi rose up and Gadaffi's tank were literally approaching the gates of the city - the French and Americans protected the city from certain massacre.

Most people in Benghazi were very grateful for the 'inference' and the calls for help in Syria - as Assad ruthlessly oppressed demonstrations - fell on deaf ears.

I don't believe it's about 'neocons' - it's about humanity.