Tony Blair claims he would have invaded Iraq even if he knew Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction. He claims he would have deployed alternative arguments but the world was "better off" without him. Well, he would say that anyway, and I can't help but feel he is attempting to smooth the route to the Iraq inquiry which he will face in the new year.
What we already have in response however are MPs rushing to say that they were conned by Blair when the Commons they voted for war in 2003. Had they known the truth about the non-existent WMDs, they claim, they would never had supported the war. I saw Tory MP Richard Ottoway making that claim. Frankly, such people are as bad, if not worse than the likes of Blair. The Tories had the opportunity to question the "evidence" in 2003. They chose not to. Instead, they were the cheerleaders for the war. They put the boot in on those who did question the evidence. It hardly bolsters their credibility now to pose as the upholders of scrutiny and peace.
Sent via BlackBerry