• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

When will mr.Blair call Iraqi war a mistake?

When will mr.Blair call Iraqi war a mistake?

  • Very soon

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 2005

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 2006

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Just before withdrawal from Iraq

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • After the withdrawal

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • After his withdrawal from DS10

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Never

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#2
There is no way the t bliar can ever possibly admit that it was a mistake. Whether or not coalition troops remain in Iraq, the reasons for going to war will consistently be banged out on the political drum, and his legacy will now be based on it.
 
#4
frankie said:
There is no way the t bliar can ever possibly admit that it was a mistake. Whether or not coalition troops remain in Iraq, the reasons for going to war will consistently be banged out on the political drum, and his legacy will now be based on it.
I never vote myself on this forum but look with interest for opinions of our friends. Personally I believe in mr.Blair, he is not a monster at all and his mental abilities are high enough. I guess that he will admitt the mistake later or sooner (though rather later) after his quit and probable lordship. I suppose it will happen in 2009-2011.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#5
Stupid question. He is a politician and a lawyer. 'Admit' is not in his vocabulary. (No medals either)
 
#7
KGB_resident said:
Personally I believe in mr.Blair, he is not a monster at all and his mental abilities are high enough. I guess that he will admitt the mistake later or sooner (though rather later) after his quit and probable lordship. I suppose it will happen in 2009-2011.
I second our Red friend with one exception and that depends on your definition of "monster". If your definition includes "a b*stard that will send better men than him to die on the basis of a lie" then you are in agreement with me.

I reckon he'll admit it around 2015 in his second (co written with the WMF) autobiography titled "How I was horribly misled by nasty men in stetsons". His first autobiography titled "How I grinned my way to victory". written around 2009 will tell how he was convinced of WMD blah blah blah so that he doesn't harm his way around the American after dinner speakers’ circuit.

By 2015 he may well have dropped out of vogue so he will need a new way to get more muller rolling in, he'll do this by "suddenly" realising that he sent people whose boots he isn't fit to sniff to fight a war at the behest of an American oil grabbing halfwit.
 
#10
Auld-Yin said:
Beria - my editing of course but if you cannot/will not vote what makes you think you can then have an opinion? Vote or silence.
I'm leutenant in reserve ... but leutenant of Russian (originally Soviet) army. As it is forum of British armed forces then it would be unfair for me to take part in voiting and distord final picture. However it seems to me that my opinions could be at least a food for mental work, could they?
 
#13
Tonee will be like that other lying cnut Heath (a pederast and to my eternal shame an ex-Gunner officer) (Mods: before you edit/delete my comment a point of law: you cannot slander or libel the dead).

Heath was a liar who deceived Britain about the EU in his arrogance. Bliar is a liar who had deceived Britain so many times it defies belief. He and Cruella da Ville (Cherie, Witch of Islington) will never admit wrongdoing. As has been pointed out, they are lawyers. They truly belive that there is no such thing as Justice, only Law.

Tonee and his opportunist companion will continue to cheapen the office that the deceiver currently holds. Like the millions of supplicants to the state that he has created (no exageration), Bliar is unable to accept the consequences of his actions. When he is eventually exposed for the lying little ******* he is (ok Mods, that bit can be modified, although I do currently enjoy diplomatic privaledge), he will doubtless claim that it is someone elses fault and he is just a victim.

Do you all remember how Romania rid themselves of Ceausescu?
 
#14
Dread said:
When he is eventually exposed for the lying little ******* that he is (ok Mods, that bit can be modified, although I do currently enjoy diplomatic privaledge)
I have no diplomatic immunity (although for Dreads 100K a year and the fact that he is about to sell a classic car to a chav he should be hung anyway) but I'll quite happily stand by the words "lying" and "*******". I'm a bit worried about "little" as that is a bit relative.
 
#15
If anything I would have put it a little stronger than Dread
But never mind, that kind of comment will no doubt become an arrestable offence in due course, probably carrying a mandatory custodial sentence without trial....
 
#17
1. He will say his mea culpas when W says his. That will be around the First of Never.

2. I'm not sure "mistake" is the right word.

The UK intelligence organs had already explained to Mr. Blair that Iraq lacked the means to make a military attack on the British Isles. The Attorney General had already explained to Mr. Blair that the government's desire to replace Saddam Hussein with someone else was not a lawful ground for an invasion.

"SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY

"DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02

"cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

"IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

"Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.

"This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

...

" It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

"The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607_1,00.html
 
#19
NWD, what an awesome link.

Having not seen that report of the Sunday Times ( as i was actually in Iraq at the time) it reinforces the belief that the Govt cannot say they are wrong.

Was that really dated 23 Jul 02?
 

Latest Threads