They are if they are Africans.
General / Off-Topic Tony Blair recognizes his responsibility in the development of Daech
- Thread starter Patrick_68000
- Start date
They are if they are Africans.
As the Chilcot inquiry is taking an unbelievable amount of time (for this length of time it better be a hand illuminated manuscript), we'll just have to make a guess as the answers. There is this piece http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34658655
:
The TLDR is:
Whole thing boils down to 4 questions.
:
Question 1: Was the information presented by the Blair government on weapons of mass destruction and other matters an accurate reflection of the underlying facts?.
Answer: No
:
Question 2: Did our military action in Iraq increase the threat to Britain from al-Qaeda?
Answer: Yes
:
Question 3: Did Tony Blair enter into a secret agreement with George W Bush that the UK would support US military action come what may?
Answer: Circumstantial evidence says Yes, but no hard evidence.
:
Question 4: Was the war legal?
Answer: No
:
Blair needs to grow a pair and properly apologise for the greatest foreign policy balls up since the end of the cold war.
:
The TLDR is:
Whole thing boils down to 4 questions.
:
Question 1: Was the information presented by the Blair government on weapons of mass destruction and other matters an accurate reflection of the underlying facts?.
Answer: No
:
Question 2: Did our military action in Iraq increase the threat to Britain from al-Qaeda?
Answer: Yes
:
Question 3: Did Tony Blair enter into a secret agreement with George W Bush that the UK would support US military action come what may?
Answer: Circumstantial evidence says Yes, but no hard evidence.
:
Question 4: Was the war legal?
Answer: No
:
Blair needs to grow a pair and properly apologise for the greatest foreign policy balls up since the end of the cold war.
Sorry: It should be question 1, but I'll make it 5. Who supplied the information and claimed it to be credible?
The phrase 'sexed-up' comes to mind, for some strange reason!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexed_up
So, what dies everyone have planned to fill the time between now and the next date when the report is due to be released?
How many people actually believe the report will be released next April?
Spin doctors supplied the information that was acted on.
Hans Blix, the security services and Dr David Kelly supplied accurate information which was ignored/actively suppressed.
The question asks if the information "presented by the Blair government" was accurate. To some extent that's all the question needs to ask. The Blair government presented information and vouched for it. If the intelligence services produced bad data, that is irrelevant, the Blair government put it's "authority" on the information. It's like Tesco blaming a supplier for creating horse lasagne. Tesco put it's name on the product, it said "Here is a product we at Tesco have deemed fit to sell", the fact they can't manage their suppliers is their fault.
.
Frankly, if the answers to Q1,2 and 4 (ignoring 3 as it will be impossible to verify) are as described then Blair is in hot water, he basically took the UK into an illegal war, that has significantly increased the threat to the UK on bad intelligence. That's about as big a failure at your job as you can get. Pretty much number 1 job of a PM is to keep the country safe and he blew it spectacularly. The fact he may have blown it for reasons related to his "invisible friend" only makes his screw up even more damning.
.
BTW, has Jeremy Corbyn officially apologised for the Iraq war yet? I'm pretty sure he said he would, just wondered if I'd missed him doing so.
- - - Updated - - -
I think Chilcot said June/July for publication. April for completion and entering into final security vetting.
I may be wrong but I am under the impression that that undertaking has gone the same way as his promises on Trident, Student fees, presenting honest debate without silly name calling and not being another Islington Tory.
Still, it might be a bit much to expect him to make any exceptions. I mean to say, if you are as passionate about equality as Corbyn claims to be, then why shouldn't he be an equal nonce?
Ok fine you want to be an ignorant fool just looking for a reason to bash Blair, just go right ahead. No skin off of my nose.
TO BE BLUNT! Blair was told by Bush junior that the CIA have 100% proof that the WMDs existed. Bush convinced Blair it WAS a fact. The whole issue holding up the current enquiry, is not the damage to British politicians, it is how to say the republicans were lying to get the Brits on side; without derailing our 'special relationship'.
Got source's for any of that ?.
I'd have to hear some pretty convincing evidence to accept that, even in part.
If it's an observation then I respect your opinion and your thinking process, but I respectfully disagree.
Easy now with the personal attacks. Lets keep this civil.
.
When you get to the top level of international politics, taking another leaders word for it, particularly when it involves one of the most important things a PM can make a decision about, doesn't cut it.
.
Saying "It's not Blair's fault, he was misled by Bush and the CIA", isn't good enough.
.
If Bush told Blair the Earth was round and there were 24hours in a day I would expect Blair to say "That's very interesting George", then instruct our own services to fact check and verify without leaning on them to give you the answer you wanted.
.
That last part is critical. I think there is at least circumstantial evidence that the agencies were pressed into "over egging" their certainty levels. Then allowing your spin doctor to massage those intelligence reports is terrible decision.
.
As an aside I once had to compile some reliability data for a product being developed by my employers. When I presented them with the fact that at a 95% confidence level, only 10% of machines would survive the design life the project manager was extremely agitated. I learned later that in a presentation to higher management the figure had been revised to 90% of machines surviving the design life which was statistically correct but only at a 5% confidence level i.e. almost certainly wrong. That is when I learned about people massaging figures to support their story. I suspect the same sort of thing happened with the intelligence.
.
I suspect the film "in the loop" is closer to the truth than we would like
.
I suspect the film "in the loop" is closer to the truth than we would like
We could believe Blair was duped by Bush. We would have to believe that George W Bush is a good deal smarter than Tony Blair, which going on their public personas is a stretch.
.
At the end of the day, politicians are judged on their results. Make a mistake, even with the best intentions and you get pilloried.
.
At best, TB dropped the ball massively on this one by allowing himself to be duped by the US and not directing his intelligence services correctly.
.
As for our "special relationship", that's a fantasy. There is no such thing at international level, it's like "Game of Thrones" with fewer dwarves (now that Sarkozy has left). Witness those players who lost, Saddam Hussein, Gadaffi, Assad, Mubarak etc. Gone from friend to foe in the blink of an eye.
.
The US and the UK are sometime allies with a shared language and a strange fascination with each other's culture. Don't forget, we are also their oldest enemy and the only nation to have occupied Washington DC.
Last edited: