My bold above - Mr Mac, you are very focused on the legality of the war. However that is only part of the view; ethics? morality? We have usually required the views of philosophers and churchmen to be taken into account when promoting a war.Micawber said:The Chilcot enquiry, some of the comment surrounding it and, to some extent, Blair's evidence has completely changed my view of the war.
The truth is it was illegal, and I wanted to see him infront of a war crimes tribunal, but really that was only because I hate him so much and taken objectively, on this issue he has a point.
So it was illegal, well who cares?
In the 1800's we, the British, decided to end the slave trade world wide and set about doing so by force.
It was a perfectly legal trade and to distrupt it was unlawful.
It also undoubtedly made the lives of many who were enslaved at the time a great deal harder - for example when the Royal Navy appeared on the horizon most slave ship captains just heaved their entire cargo overboard.
But surely no-one can claim that what we were doing was the wrong thing?
Unfortunately all the noise over the legal stuff has let them dodge the real issue, which was the utter incompetence with which the job was carried out.
That's the unforgivable bit, the lack of kit etc and the fact that no-one seems to have read beyond the first paragraph of any plan or given any sensible thought whatsoever as to the aftermath.
He should still be burned at the stake but at a loser, not a lawbreaker.
Blair isn't a Sir Thomas More, despite Ally Campbell's PR intent on wishing that view on us.