tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6905040611865595428.post6703517670730458062..comments2023-12-23T01:50:58.650+00:00Comments on Events Dear Boy, Events: Blair-baiting, Suez and Anthony EdenEvents dear boy, eventshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13027032420000802501noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6905040611865595428.post-72394463308984391502010-01-29T00:55:04.591+00:002010-01-29T00:55:04.591+00:00If you mean the part we played in 'making'...If you mean the part we played in 'making' Iraq Howard I doubt it. What I mean is that with our invasion of Iraq, and the international knowledge that it hadn't threatened the UK in any way, has cost our reputation dearly and perhaps made us far less secure than ever in my lifetime.subrosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00151702590329788260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6905040611865595428.post-42772459988617456372010-01-28T13:10:52.927+00:002010-01-28T13:10:52.927+00:00Subrosa, I have to disagree. Suez was a watershe...Subrosa, I have to disagree. Suez was a watershed for the UK as a world power. Iraq was not.<br /><br />However, I grant you that the debate is worth having. Interesting is it not, that the dead-tree press have failed in this regard.Events dear boy, eventshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13027032420000802501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6905040611865595428.post-48803755053686264752010-01-28T13:06:45.466+00:002010-01-28T13:06:45.466+00:00The point I am trying to make is that Eden, for al...The point I am trying to make is that Eden, for all his faults as Prime Minister, which were considerable (Suez was the icing on the cake), he was treated in a much more respectfully than Blair.<br /><br />Eden was a total failure as PM, much like Brown is today. The only difference being Eden won an election.<br /><br />If we take your point that "the failings are of the magnitude of Suez" then Blair should be treated in a similar way as Eden was in his day.Events dear boy, eventshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13027032420000802501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6905040611865595428.post-87721883999083322862010-01-28T13:03:41.478+00:002010-01-28T13:03:41.478+00:00Well said Jess. I would also argue that Iraq will...Well said Jess. I would also argue that Iraq will do far more damage in future years than Suez ever did. The world is now a very different place.subrosahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00151702590329788260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6905040611865595428.post-40454384902566681462010-01-28T12:39:02.390+00:002010-01-28T12:39:02.390+00:00I recommend the Iraq Inquiry Digest for a comprehe...I recommend the Iraq Inquiry Digest for a comprehensive and detailed commentary on Iraq.<br /><br />http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/<br /><br />The evolving narrative fits neither the established pro- or anti- war camps. But it damns the government of the day.<br /><br />- Blair committed UK troops to action in early 2002.<br /><br />- this committment was not conditional and was robust enough to allow UK participation in top secret NOFORN planning some seven weeks later (unthinkable otherwise).<br /><br />- Blair believed (self-belief) that he would obtain either 'smoking gun' intelligence or a UN resolution authorising war.<br /><br />- Blair persuaded Bush to exhaust either course of action before military action.<br /><br />- No WMD smoking gun was found (the September dossier fizzled).<br /><br />- The emphasis shifted to the UN process.<br /><br />- 1441 was the worst possible fudge, interpreted variously as both having and lacking the requirement for a further UN decision<br /><br />- A second resolution was sought unsuccesfully - a requirement, according to Goldsmith's view at the time.<br /><br />- They realised 1441 was the best they were going to get and there was no convincing intelligence (which was quite to the contrary).<br /><br />- The February dossier shifted the narrative to Saddam's regime and noncompliance.<br /><br />- Goldsmith realised the US (and by extension the UK) were going in anyway (and didn't view a resolution as necessary) and changed his opinion for his client (Blair).<br /><br />- Blair determined that there was a material breach of 1441 (authority and evidence highly questionable) and this negated the 1991 ceasefire.<br /><br />- The UK went to war with the attendant consequences.<br /><br />- If unchallenged, the precedent now exists to enforce similarly vague UN resolutions in the same way (ie Iran) without UN authority.<br /><br />The failings are of the magnitude of Suez...only we have less further to fall as a nation rather than an empire.Jess The Doghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01694805454982688213noreply@blogger.com