[Closed] Chilcot Report, July 6th

yes, that's right Jamb, possibly millions of innocent people have died, and a country's been ruined, but you're right the important thing is the fact that it's going to be a bit politically embarrassing for the Labour party...

Bravo

Does anyone really GAS this long after the event?

The report I reckon will get delayed on a technicality, be proposed for a new release date of 2018/08 and we will all have given up thinking it's important, whilst in the mean time Blair charges for speeches on humanity in the Middle East.

Only politics and politicians save their own kind, this report will be full of bullshite.

@nick I agree with you, what is the point of a report into the mechanics of the decision to invade ? It is a Labour Party obsession which is why Gordon Brown comissioned it.

Whatever people here think about Blair the UN and EU appointed him as the Middle East peace envoy

Whatever people here think about Blair the UN and EU appointed him as the Middle East peace envoy

That is the only sensible criticism of the EU you have ever made.

Just imagine the screams of horror and derision from the left when they open the report and find that the longwaited words of criticism against Blair are actually rather mild, even non existent, that he acted on advice received (that later proved to be wrong) and that it specifically states no laws, national or international, were broken 😐

It's gonna be a whitewash , just like all the other "enquiries"

Blair did it.

Ninfan may have it.

And the Tories were happy to go along with it, so should avoiding pointing out the colour of the kettle.

Most wars are ill advised decisions based on flawed info and lead to major loss of life for little, if any, gain. A massively self indulgent waste of public money.

While I support the need for the enquiry into historic child abuse, I suspect that may turn into Chillcot 2 in terms of deadline and budget. Too many lawyers protecting too many backs. Again.

Guardian piece including Blair on Andrew Marr today speaking about the report and confirming he would be part of an "open debate" about its contents

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/29/tony-blair-hints-he-could-refuse-to-accept-chilcots-iraq-war-verdict ]Guardian Link[/url]

Families of those killed will get an Executive summary and a pre-release briefing of the Chilcot report but will have to pay £767 for the whole 12 volumes and the printing costs would be far below that - saving what £50k, £100k ?

What a disgrace

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/03/families-of-iraq-war-dead-will-have-to-pay-767-for-full-chilcot/ ]Link[/url]

jamba - not sure when the telegraph updated their copy, but as at 17:42 (your post at 17:00), both it and the BBC say No10 have confirmed that families get free copies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36442521

What a disgrace

Five days ago you said : [i]"Quite what a report will tell us so long after the event I don't know, does it really matter if Blair gave Bush an assurance we would be part of an invasion before he told Parliament ?"[/i]

Now you're claiming this report is so important that the families of anyone killed in Iraq should get a free copy. Make your mind up.

Once it's been commissioned Ernie it should be seen by them in full. In general we have to deal with the situation as it is today and not how we wished it might have been.

@Stoner yes, just seen that.

£767? I'm waiting for the paperback.

Does anyone really GAS this long after the event?

Quite a few of us I think!

Maybe you'd like to start a "What tyre?" thread or something else equally epoch making discussion.....

Chilcott isn't just about Blair; it's about the decision making that leads us into wars, through wars, and what we do afterwards. It's our conduct in one of the most serious actions a country can take. There's no timetable on which that suddenly becomes irrelevant. It's plain we need a better and more transparent process for the road to a war- whether it's shady deals and decisions made before we make decisions, or the response to an attorney general's advice that war would be illegal simply being stopping talking to the attorney general... or imaginary Syrian armies that'll rise up and support us. The fact that Chilcott was needed at all and that it's run to such huge size and duration says a lot about the process itself.

Whatever people here think about Blair the UN and EU appointed him as the Middle East peace envoy

Looks at region since he was appointed

Confirms it was indeed a masterstroke and harmony has broken out everywhere

TBH can anyone state ANYTHING at all he did good bad or indifferent without googling?

I suppose we should be grateful it kept him out the press??

[i]Families of those killed will get an Executive summary and a pre-release briefing of the Chilcot report but will have to pay £767 for the whole 12 volumes and the printing costs would be far below that - saving what £50k, £100k ?[/i]

Didn't I read that it would be available online for free anyway?

Yep, seems so:

http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/news/2016-06-02_ordering_a_copy_of_the_iraq_inquiry_report.aspx

It's going to be a bland, anodyne attempt to calm the waters - and has been delayed so long that, sadly, the majority of people don't give a toss even if they ever did

Luckily Blair is apparently going to be judged by God who can't possibly be so ****ing stupid as to let him off

[img] [/img]

Can't see what this will achieve

Other than confirm whatever bias they already have, jambs taking 2 opposing positions on it depending on how he wants to score points being the perfect example.

And the Tories were happy to go along with it, so should avoiding pointing out the colour of the kettle

Quite, Blair nearly lost the vote for war, 1/3rd of labour MPs rebelled, is only because 9 out of 10 Tory MPs voted for it that it passed.

sadly, the majority of people don't give a toss even if they ever did

Apathy rules ok...?

As has been stated, it would take a monumental feat of laziness not to see the premised purpose of this report as being very important.

What's in the report on the other hand is another thing..

I suspect it will be 10,000 pages which tells us very little we didn't already know and they'll be half a dozen bland recommendations which everyone agrees to implement and then ignores. I suspect that in a years time no one will remember anything from it.

After such a long wait, it can but only profoundly disappoint, esp as everyone mentioned in it had the chance to get bits changed.

@br, yes right you are. The families where told they could read it online.

@Northwind, that is an interesting a far reaching question as basically the PM can decide to go to war with a vote of the cabinet (and he can fire them all if they don't agree). He would need an opinion that war was legal which is obviously one of the key questions here. I have always said and posted here I was against the invasion of Iraq at that time, we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan and in my fiew we hadn't fully understood the rescources required. However once in there we had to be more committed than we where and both the US and the UK should not have withdrawn when they did.

@footflaps - it seems many people are hoping it will crucify Blair, I doubt it will. The biggest fallout is going to be an even more fractured Labour Party detrmined to commit hari-kari

jambalaya - Member

@Northwind, that is an interesting a far reaching question

It's not a question.

kimbers - Member

jambs taking 2 opposing positions on it depending on how he wants to score points being the perfect example.

Nail on the head imo. jambalaya sees the Chilcot Inquiry as opportunity to gain maximum political millage to suit his own agenda. Speculating what it might contain rather than waiting until after July 6th when a more informed discussion can take place (apparently despite being over 6 years in the making he's too impatient to wait another month) fits in nicely with that frame of mind - he can make all sorts of claims about the inquiry without waiting for the actual facts.

.

With reference to this comment by jambalaya :

[i]"A Prime Minister is under no obligation so do so or even seek a debate or a vote."[/i]

The British legislative process is based largely on tradition and protocol.

This is the headstone above Robin Cook's grave :

[img] [/img]

[i][b]"I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of parliament to decide on war"[/i][/b]

+1 ernie..

10 days till Chilcot. At least we'll have something other than the EU to argue about

Internation Criminal Court comfirms it wil take no action against Blair as that's outside its remit. It may however pursue actions againsr individual soldiers. Alex Salmond it seems is likely to pirsue an impeachment action against him which i think is a total,wastre of time with zero chance of success.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/02/outrage-as-war-crimes-prosecutors-say-tony-blair-will-not-be-inv/ ]Telegragph Link[/url]

MP's will see the report on Tuesday with publication on Wednesday

Getting a bit excited there, So it's out on Tuesday, 12 volumes? So if you can do us a concise summary by the weekend 😉

Is there not internet forums just for the shit that Jamba posts every day, instead of a bike forum?. I seriously cannot believe that he even has time to think about, never mind actually ride a bike.

And he's not the only one. Get a grip.

Is there not internet forums just for the shit that Jamba posts every day, instead of a bike forum?. I seriously cannot believe that he even has time to think about, never mind actually ride a bike.

And he's not the only one. Get a grip.

Errr, this is the chat forum...

Nobeer - feel free to scroll by.

Any likely Labour leader at that time (Blair, Brown ..) would have joined the Americans in Iraq. Personally I have always said it was a mistake as we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan and we where underestimating the scale of the task. Emma Sky's excellent book makes it clear however that the real disaster was Obama's rush to withdraw.

@mike as I'm not a senior MP I won't get to see it early 2.6 million pages too. Even the 41 pages of Shamri's report where hard going

Whilst I understand the desire to know more I think its a pointless excersize which will only serve to demonise the military and a feeding frenzy for the left leading them to self destruction

Errr, this is the chat forum

Quite, but it's the same pish day in, day out.

Tomorrow is the day.

Shadow and Government ministers will have seen the conclusions. Will be getting their thoughts and press briefings ready. Corbyn's last stand ?

[img] [/img]

[img] :large[/img]

Oh dear

[img] [/img]

Dear oh dear

Tony Blair is expected to blame intelligence failures over Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction for his controversial decision to take Britain to war, as he faces legal action from the families of troops killed in the conflict.

Sources close to the former Prime Minister signalled he will point out “the intelligence we received was wrong” as he prepares to defend himself against heavy censure from Sir John Chilcot's seven-year-long Iraq Inquiry.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/05/chilcot-inquiry-blair-to-blame-intelligence-failings-as-he-faces/ ]Telegragph Link[/url]

[img] [/img]

Some people saying Chilcot not dealing with legality of war others saying he is.

He's reporting at 11ish I think.

Suing politicians that lie will be an interesting precedent.

Like it or not soldiers sign up to do the government's bidding, and they do that knowing that many conflicts that they will potentially be involved in will be ill advised, or based on half truths and personal agendas.

It may not be right, but its a fact of life. Can't see them having a cats in hells chance of success with that one.

Interesting article from John Rentoul:

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/john-rentoul-tony-blair-and-chilcot-report-891022149

[i]However, the simple question that has to be asked is why Bush and Blair would invent a pretext for war that would be found out afterwards. If they were dishonest enough to invent the weapons of mass destruction story, surely they would be dishonest enough to plant some in the deserts of Anbar?[/i]

Good question...

John Rentoul's tongue is firmly (and moistly) up Blairs arse

There is always more to the story...