How to charge Blair


Why should Blair be charged? Is he being made out to be a scapegoat? If the war was a success you would not hear about this.


His opponent was revolutionary Iran, which was perceived as a menace to the whole World, attacking international shipping and supporting terrorists for a start. As to your second sentence, surely it is the job of intelligence types to look at any weapon use to build an understanding of things like effectiveness and possible countermeasures?

The thing is that revolutionary Iran has somehow benefited from the fiasco in Iraq. It was good that Saddam was removed, though I don't believe the official reason for the war. It's what followed that led to disaster.


I know this has been done, but it’s 2021, many new members don’t want to read 200 pages of an old thread, but mods can decide.

What would it take to bring former PM Tony Blair to face war crimes?

I am guilty of just watching a one sided film called Official Secrets, mainly because I was duped by the government at the time and yes, I feel like I have an axe to grind.

In my defense, no WMD were found so I have the argument of hindsight, but having seen a lot of behind the scenes footage post GW2 that isn’t so telling to those in the know at the time.

Whilst the grinning idiot makes millions of pounds seemingly uncaring of the thousands he sent to death or maimed, why is it that he doesn’t (or his master Bush) seem to get any mainstream investigation into their potential involvement in war crimes?

Even Russia and China don’t seem to amp up the rhetoric.

Could they (Bush and Blair) face a criminal/civil/other case for the war, or are they clean from a legal perspective?

Selfishly I want to write off this episode of injustice in my mind or else I will start putting money away for false teeth as I grind these ones I have down every time I see that traitors face/name.
In 2003 there were two "justifications" kicking around. Regime change and self defence. Either provided legal cover for the US. Only one worked for the UK, that of "self fefence" that is to say that the existence and intent to use WMD posed an intolerable threat to UK interests. The WMD red herring was the one that finally unlocked TCBs already given undertaking to George Dublya (an undertaking given, I think in Sept or Oct 2002). Finally the attorney General could give TCB the thumbs up.

So George is flameproof. TCB is not.

Happy to give evidence.

The film "the Green Zone" is pretty close to the truth.


War Hero
I thought a lot of it was because D-Day was moved forward by a week at the insistence of the Septics.

Plus, we'd had to change lots of other plans at short notice when the Turks changed their minds about helping out
Nope, we had shortages every where, I was attached to 40 Cdo for that gig, we had shortages of body armour plates, ORP. ( we were feed a lot of chicken super noodles), the only thing there was not a shortage of was ammo and water, so it was not all bad, my bezzy oppo in 2nd Tanks told me they did not get all their ammo until just short of H hour! Loggy wise I have always looked at 2003 as a **** up, pure and simple. Others may differ, but such is life.

Latest Threads