What I would ask Tony Blair if at the Chilcot Iraq Inquiry

Today will be a pivotal day in British politics when former Prime Minister Tony Blair faces Sir John Chilcot at the Iraq Inquiry, although as we now know, he has been economical with the truth before, will he do so once again.

However, that aside the Iraq Inquiry has to ask him some key questions and if I were there, I would ask the following of Tony Blair, in no particular order;

1. Why were you so determined to invade Iraq?

2. In your own mind, what was the threat that you made the final decision to attack based on?

3. Why did you and your team creat the 45 minutes weapons of mass destruction argument?

4. Why did you ignore the legal advice given?

5. How instrumental were you in the change of advice from the Attorney General?

6. Was Saddam Hussein as big a threat as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

7. Wasn't the unrest in Afghanistan and Pakistan a greater threat to the UK than that of Saddam Hussein's regime?

8. Why did you and your fellow Ministers give Liberal Democrat MPs such a hard time, given they are completely vindicated now and were perfectly entitled to hold a different view?

9. Which of your actions from the time do you regret now?

10. What would you do differently if you had the chance to do it all again?

11. Do you agree with the view of the current government in witholding crucial papers from the time?

12. What were your reasons for ignoring the United Nations?

I am sure there would be supplementary questions, and I am sure I could come up with more but they are the ones that I have often thought about over the time.

Let us hope that tomorrow sees some complete honesty, as others have before him, I won't hold my breath though - there's an election in 98 days.

Why did Labour not order the helicopters needed when we were fighting in Iraq?

One thing coming out of the Iraq inquiry, is the admittance by Minister after Minister that there were not enough helicopters for our troops in Iraq.

Now, if there wasn't enough then, how on earth could Gordon Brown constantly defend the helicopter numbers when Nick Clegg asked at Prime Ministers Questions week after week, when where the Government going to put enough helicopters into Afghanistan?

Simple arithmetic shows if there were not enough in the illegal war in Iraq, and then you move troops immediatey, and sometimes concurrently, into Afghanistan there were less helicopters!

So, why does the government continue to say there is enough?

In July at PMQ's Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg was claiming British strategy in Afghanistan was "over-ambitious in aim and under-resourced in practice".

But Gordon Brown insisted Britain did have the resources "to do the job" and helicopter numbers had increased 60% since 2006 but now as we see and hear, that 60% increase was from such a low starting base.

The row continued into October last year when Lt Col Rupert Thorneloe, 39, commanding officer of the 1st Battalion, Welsh Guards, died in a roadside bombing.

In memos leaked by an official to Tory MP Adam Holloway, a former officer, Col Thorneloe said too many trips were by road, leaving forces vulnerable.

The government had denied an absence of helicopters had led to any deaths in Afghanistan.

Bob Ainsworth went on to defend the government and said "We know the value of helicopters on operations and that is why we have increased the numbers and types, improved engines and almost doubled flying hours."

He also said additional Merlin helicopters were being deployed and more Chinook helicopters would be sent during the coming year.

I think that in 30 years when Cabinet papers are released we will see that the Labour government acted, but too slowly and too late and we are still denying our troops the correct and up to date equipment to fight the battles we ask them to fight.

I appreciate we are asking the government to tighten it's belt rather than this continued wild spending, but we must not ask our troops, who are all hereos, to do the job we pay them to do with sub standard equipment.

Gordon Brown to appear before the Chilcot Iraq Inquiry

Finally, Gordon Brown has conceded defeat and will be appearing before the Chilcot Iraq Inquiry after repeated calls by Nick Clegg amongst others.

Nick Clegg and democracy have won the day.

Now, Gordon Brown, who signed all of the cheques to pay for the illegal war in Iraq will have to appear in front of the Iraq Inquiry to explain his actions, potentially as early now as next week.

With Alistair Campbell giving evidence last week and then issuing a "what I meant to say statement", Jack Straw giving evidence yesterday, and Tony Blair due soon as well, the heat is being turned up on Labour and the Government.

Jack Straw, now the Justice Secretary, told the Iraq Inquiry yesterday that he supported the Iraq war “very reluctantly” when he was the Foreign Secretary at the time.

He added that he could have stopped Tony Blair going ahead with his intention of joining the US invasion and that he had warned Blair that it would be illegal just to overthrow Saddam and pressed for the United Nations to resolve the crisis peacefully.

I really doubt that Jack Straw could have stopped Blair given Tony has admitted he would have sent troops into Iraq, and would have found any reason to do so.

Jack Straw also said that he had presented Tony Blair with an alternative plan the evening before the crucial House of Commons vote on the war that did not involve committing British troops.

I am delighted that both Gordon Brown and Tony Blair will be called to appear in front of the Inquiry before the election because I think voters deserve to know the truth, but I also remind people that Cameron's Conservatives supported Tony Blair and Gordon Brown all the way.

It was Charles Kennedy and the Liberal Democrats that provided the loudest voice of opposition, especially in the House of Commons, which then turned into a massive wave of opposition across the UK.

Let us now see what Brown and Blair were hiding and have the Liberal Democrats and many others proved right once again.

Iraq inquiry turning in a cover up and whitewash

So now we learn that the Prime Minister Gordon Brown and members of the Cabinet will not be giving evidence to the Iraq Inquiry until after the general election - what a bloody disgrace.

I am starting to wonder if this is an inquiry or just a government funded whitewash?

Sir John Chilcot's committee will wait until after polling day to interview Gordon Brown, David Miliband and Douglas Alexander.

Although New Labour former spin doctor, Alistair Campbell, former attorney general Lord Goldsmith, Tony Blair, Des Browne MP, John Reid, Geoff Hoon, Jack Straw, Margaret Beckett, Lord Turnbull and Chief of the Defence Staff Air Chief Marshall Sir Jock Stirrup will all be called in January or early February before the inquiry is put on ice until after polling day.

I think this is an insult to the intelligence of British voters, and I do wonder what influence has been placed on Sir John Chilcot to do this? Given the amount of Labour seats the Liberal Democrats are targeting it just smells a little of a done deal in the darkened corridors of Westminster.

Sir John Chilcott says the decision to allow the Prime Minister and Cabinet members to give evidence after the general election is to ensure the inquiry stays outside party politics.
















I think this is just nonsense, they made their decisions as Labour MPs so surely can give evidence in the same manner? What difference does the timing make? If the opposition parties are going to make anything of it they still can, although the Tories have no right to do so as it was they and the Labour Parties who united to take us into the illegal war in Iraq.

Tony Blair has made it clear he would have taken us into war anyhow but always needed the support of Cameron's Tories and as we know he got it.

They should all hang their heads in shame!