Tony Blair is a liar and a war criminal
Welcome to 'Letters From A Tory', covering British politics from a conservative perspective. Please leave a comment if you have any thoughts about today's letter, and don't forget that you can CLICK HERE to get my letters sent to you by RSS every morning.
Dear Tony Blair,
As your bid to become EU President stumbled in a very public fashion, I wondered whether European leaders were nervous about the impending inquiry into the Iraq War. Yesterday’s revelations in the Sunday Telegraph that military commanders are expected to tell the inquiry that the invasion was ill-conceived and that preparations were sabotaged by your attempts to mislead the public make it clear that you are not fit for office and not fit to be given the time of day.
To describe the documents leaked to the Sunday Telegraph as ‘damning’ simply would not do them justice. The documents are “post-operational reports” and “lessons learned” papers compiled by the army and its field commanders. They refer to a “rushed” operation that caused “significant risk” to troops and “critical failure” in the postwar period – otherwise known as a complete shambles. One commander, describing the supply chain, added: “I know for a fact that there was one container full of skis in the desert”. Some troops were deployed in civilian flights to countries neighbouring Iraq with their equipment “brought in by hand baggage”. Items considered dangerous, including penknives and nail scissors, were confiscated from them. Interviewed for the postwar report drawn up by the MoD, Brigadier Bill Moore was asked: “Did you receive the correct level of advice for the nation-building you faced?” He replied: “We got absolutely no advice whatsoever. The lack of advice from the FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office], the Home Office and DFID [the Department for International Development] was appalling.” The “lessons learned” report stated: “Never again must we send ill-equipped soldiers into battle”. However, many of the failures recounted in leaked documents and given in evidence to Commons committees, notably relating to equipment, were repeated in Afghanistan.
Significantly, the documents support what officials have earlier admitted – that the army was not allowed to prepare properly for the Iraq invasion in 2002 so as not to alert parliament and the UN that Blair was already determined to go to war. The documents add: “In Whitehall, the internal operational security regime, in which only very small numbers of officers and officials were allowed to become involved [in Iraq invasion preparations] constrained broader planning for combat operations and subsequent phases effectively until Dec 23 2002.” In effect, you wanted to hide your true intentions by only informing a few officials. You blatantly lied to MPs by claiming as late as July 2002 that the goal was “disarmament, not regime change” when you had already promised George Bush that you would join the US-led invasion (the leaked documents reveal that “from March 2002 or May at the latest there was a significant possibility of a large-scale British operation”). Of course, we already know that this came despite warnings from Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, that the “desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action.”
For military commanders to speak so candidly shows the scale of their disgust about your politicisation and interference. You did everything you could to deceive MPs, deceive the public, deceive the UN and distort the reality of what you were planning with George Bush. Indeed, the military commanders were so shocked by the lack of preparation for the aftermath of the invasion that they believe members of the British and US governments could be prosecuted for war crimes by breaching the duty outlined in the Geneva convention to safeguard civilians in a conflict. Sir John Chilcot, the Iraq war inquiry’s chairman, promised to produce a “full and insightful” account of how Britain was drawn into the conflict and said he and his team would not shrink from making criticisms of individuals or organisations, but he stressed the inquiry was not a court of law set up to determine issues of guilt and innocence. I know that you will avoid jail for your lies and treachery, but in my eyes you will always be a criminal.
Yours in disgust,
A.Tory
Witanagemot Blogs
It has always struck me as being slightly odd that Blair needed to conceal that fact that there was planning in place for a war in Iraq, whether he had parliamentary support and a UN resolution or not.
Surely it would have created greater pressure on Saddam to comply if he feared a UK force which was well prepared for the invasion. A desert war should have been one of a number of operational contigencies that the UK forces were openly preparing for as a standard procedure. None of that would run contrary to the goal of disarmament, it would only bolster the chance of succeding in that goal without a shot being fired.
How can we call Britain the nation with the best armed forces in the world if we cannot openly prepare for any possible situation?
The reality is that Sir John Chilcott has been given his remit, and it will centre on the conduct of the war and the peace keeping operation without dealing with the fundemental dishonesties of the Blair regime. The previous whitewash was used as an excuse to exclude that this time round.
In the (paraphrased) words of Sir Humphrey: ‘first you choose the outcome, then the chairman who can be relied upon to achieve it’.
Unfortunately, despite plentiful evidence of the lack of morality in this administration, I still think they are well protected by substantial sections of the media, who will protect them no matter what (and thus influence the sheep in this country).
If Cammy and his lot don’t go after these criminals then they are complicit and just as bad…
And I’d expect Tony to pop up somewhere else in the not to distant. He’s currently spending a lot of time with his faith foundation, so who knows what webs he’s weaving…..
Spot on, LFAT
Tony, I see where you’re coming from but it was politically essential for Blair to maintain the illusion of listening to the UN and other countries while preparing for war, because ignoring the UN from the word ‘go’ would have resulted in a massive backlash.
FLS, I fear that Cameron will just say that he’s got other things to worry about and the Chilcot Inquiry is the last word on the matter. Why would he risk setting himself up for a big fall in future?
DP, thanks.
I agree with every word of this. He is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqi civilians and over 100 of our servicemen ….. and let’s not forget Dr David Kelly, who we are led to believe, committed ’suicide’ in very strange circumstances as a result of being hounded by Blair’s attack dogs. And Dr David Kelly was telling the truth.
Blair is a vile and despicable Liar. I am so glad I saw through him from day one and never voted for the creep.
LFAT, I recall speculation at the time that the real motive for Blair going to war in Iraq was that he wanted his very own Thatcher/Falklands success. Any truth in that ?
Alan Douglas
Thats one of the reasons he wanted to be EU President, it thought it would give him immunity.
Also, is it true that taxpayers are complicit in war crimes by knowingly paying taxes which directly fund these illegal wars? Something that came out of the Nuremberg Trials, I believe!
Absolutely not, as the taxpayer would be in no position to refuse to pay, as this would be a domestic criminal offence punishable by potential imprisonment
Never heard of this Sue. I very much doubt that is remotely true.
In Woodward’s very very long series of 3 books on the Iraq invasion it is clear that it was a rushed plan without adequate resourcing from day one. He explores,in detail that actually becomes tedious as it is so repetitive, the actions of the US government. TB gets some space but he is really just a nodding dog to an already agreed US policy of war.
The difference between Bush and Blair is Bush didn’t attempt to pretend that it was anything other than a mission to remove Saddam. Blair, as is clear from his speeches to the wavering Labour MPs alone, was pursuing an agenda. Its amazing that TB was able to just walk away without his actions being seriously challenged or being asked to account for them in any meaningful way.
Boudicca, Dr Kelly’s extremely suspicious death remains one of the most disturbing incidents of the Iraq war saga.
Alan, hadn’t heard that before. I am, however, concerned that his religious beliefs may have strongly influenced him.
Sue, even the whole of the EU wouldn’t quite be enough to accommodate Blair’s ego.
Tony, agreed.
Bill, Blair behaved like Bush’s poodle but without him Bush would have been unable to go to war without risking a much more widespread conflict.
The correct metaphor is that of a condom.
Blair was a British prophylactic that Bush wore in order to f*** the UN and International Law like the dirty w**** that it is.
The scene: St. Petersburg G8 summit, 2006: a desk microphone has, inadvertently, been left ‘live’.
‘A bored and resentful Bush greeted the prime minister with good-natured disdain – ‘Yo, Blair!’ – and treated him like a put-upon valet, a part Blair played very convincingly, bowing and scraping as he obsequiously offered to help the Americans in the Middle East, in any way they might want: ‘I don’t know what you guys have talked about, but, as I say, I am perfectly happy to try and see what the lie of the land is….’ When Bush reminded him that Condoleezza Rice, the Secretary of State, was going there, Blair added in still more revealing words, ‘Well….it’s only if, I mean….you know. If she’s got a…..or if she needs the ground prepared, as it were…..Because obviously if she goes out, she’s got to succeed, as it were, whereas I can go out and just talk.’
‘….as Maureen Dowd of the New York Times put it with painfully accurate wit, the Prime Minister ‘was hovering and wheedling like an abused wife’. (Yo, Blair! Geoffrey Wheatcroft, 2006)
Pathetic!
Alan, I’m sure that electoral politics and Blair’s own massive ego must have come into play at some stage in the process!
Boudicca & LFAT. I agree that Dr Kelly’s death was extremely suspicious, but even if he did commit suicide (very unlikely for him to do so in the manner alleged) that should never disguise the fact that he was hung out to dry by Blair & Campbell in an attempt to cover their own arses, (and possibly that of John Scarlett, former Cabinet Office Chief and the chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee, who then became head of SIS).
I’m no conspiracy theorist, but I’d like to see that investigated again once Labour are out of power.
Sigh, those that call Blair a war criminal, don’t know what a bloody war criminal is.
[...] 1. A Letter from a braindead Tory – HAH! Has anyone reminded this crowd that their party would have done exactly the same as Blair, AND voted for it anyway? Nincom-bloody-poops! [...]
Is this why taxpayers are still funding his security http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23752394-tony-blair-criticised-for-asking-to-keep-24-hour-armed-guard.do
And why he asks “first-class travel must be paid for during booking for the Blair family, its security detail and stylists” to be paid by those booking him to speak? http://www.tonyblairoffice.org.uk/
@Tony E – I just wondered. I had read it somewhere.
@Tony E – I just wondered. I had read it somewhere. I think some Americans have stopped paying income tax on that premise.
There is surely no reason why Blair could not be prosecuted in a civil trial for his serial lies during the build-up to Iraq?
I for one would be happy to contribute to a fighting fund.
While legally blair is a war criminal & should be imprisoned the problem with this & so many other articles saying so is that their selectivity denies them any moral superiority.
I am not just talkingh of the tory support of the war though that is bad.
The previous war against Yugoslavia was, any any standard whatsoever, more clearly & disgracefully criminal.It was fought against a democratic state not a dictatorship. It was fought against a state which had no record of foreign adventure, indeed the exact reverse. It was a state whose “unity & territorial integrity” we had & indeed still have specifically undertaken to uphold (wording of the Helsinki treaty). While it was possible to beleive Iraq might have had some WMDs somewhere Parliament knew that the only genocide in Kosovo was being carried out by the NATO armed & organised KLA. That war was targeted overwhelmingly against civilians (80% of killings). When NATO occupied Kosovo we deliberately broke the occupation agreement, to disarm the KLA & run a non-racist administration, by enrolling the KLA as our police & giving them authority to engage in genocide. We authorised massacres such as the 210 killed outside our main base in Dragocan. We authorised the ethnic cleansing of 350,000. We authorised the kidnap, rape & sale abroad of schoolgirls. Ultimately we authorised the police kidnap of at least 1300 Yugoslavs & their dissection, while still alive, to provide organs for our hospitals. By comparison Abu Graib barely counts as naughty.
Blair is indeed a war crimional & should face ultimate punishment but almost the entire British & NATO political leadership is also guilty of crimes against humanity exceeeding in horror, though not in numbers, those of Mr Hitler. It is hypocritical to single him out for what is clearly a much lesser crime.