Blair knighthood

[Mummyrowland]

Nearly half a million people have signed a petition over his knighthood in 48 hours.

It should be removed and he shouldn't be awarded it.

After all what did he do that was good?

What about all the squaddies he sent to their deaths over the supposed wmds?

High ranking members of the armed forces are threatening resignation if his award isn't reconsider

Margaret thatcher ruined this country and was made baroness. Cameron put the final nail in the coffin with brexit and he will get knighted. So will Johnson who is currently kicking the corpse of the UK down the road to make money for himself and his cronies.

Personally I liked Blair and I think he made the best decisions he could with the political situation and intelligence at hand at the time. I never thought there were any WMD either at the time and I thought 2nd Iraq war motivation was a combination of oil driven and Personal vendetta of GWB. There are a lot of leaders who send troups into battle or make decisions that kill. I think the honours are about the service and not the effect of that service. I don't like the honours system much TBH but don't think Blair's knighthood is the biggest problem we have.

@Blossomtoes

But that series was made in the last couple of years. Of course he’d say that now, I’m pretty sure he didn’t at the time. And, even if he did, he should have resigned if Blair wouldn’t listen to him. I’m not buying it.

I can't find any evidence he said that. Not even in the Parliamentary enquiry.

Nor can I @luckylavender. That’s why I wondered if there was a link. Like pp the decade of Blair’s premiership was the best politically of my life time. I too remember that absolute euphoria on the morning of 2 May 1997.

[quote Alexandra2001]@madisonbridges Obviously you feel strongly about this but please remember the wars in Iraq (both of them) would haver happened anyway, George Bush Jnr was always going to invade, the UK just lent it a little legitimacy, the 100s of 1000s killed would have still died.

Blix was never going to find WMD's with Saddam still in charge and Saddam did have them, ask the Kurds?

Its all very well being wise after the event but had Saddam still had just a small amount of nerve gas and then used them on Israel or in Europe, the wests lack of action would have been heavily criticised.

Also, the inquiry found Blair did not lie.[/quote]
Bush is responsible for Bush's actions and is answerable to his own electorate. Blair made his own choice. As a British voter the inevitability of Bush invading Iraq is immaterial to me. There was so much evidence that Saddam had no weapons that would be of threat that Blair had to take a students thesis and plagiarise it as evidence in order to get parliament and the electorate to support him. That is an insult to me. But I could stomach an invasion of Iraq to get rid of Saddam if they had had a proper plan in place for after the war. But he couldn't even do that right. He entered illegally and then carried out a shambles of an operation. That reverberates today.

Blix didn't find WMD because there were none to find. It's incredible to me that you think there were still some there. If there had have been, do you not think they would have been found by now. The Kurds were gassed in 1988. If the Kurds know where there are more chemical weapons, why aren't they speaking up? The UN inspectors had been in Iraq since 1991. By 1995 they were pretty much sure everything had been destroyed.

Blair had a dossier put together that was a cut and paste job by staff in Campbells office, including a students thesis, to persuade mps to support a war. I could not give a rat's tutu whether a court thinks that's a lie or not. The fact is Blair apologised for it...after he won his vote and invaded.

And then he got himself appointed peace envoy to the middle east whilst taking millions from the UAE. Well, he might as well profit from the war he lent legitimacy to. No?

@Alexandra2001
Obviously you feel strongly about this

I don't feel particularly strongly about Tony Blair or his knighthood actually. Nor do I think he should go to prison. But I do get cross at things being pushed away as minor or an error of judgement. And I will argue anyone who maintains that position.

And for the record, being PM, even a bad one, is incredibly tough. I don't have a problem with any PM getting a knighthood. If an actor can get one for being paid millions, why not a PM?

Blair made his own choice

Endorsed by a cross party majority Commons vote. It was a collective decision.

@PersonaNonGarter

Of course he should be knighted.

I never voted for him, but millions did and he was PM for a long time and acted on what he thought was right.

Despite thinking he was a tit when he was in office, I have felt genuinely sorry for him on occasion since. His party literally cannot see that without him they would have been out of power even longer. They are so weirdly ungrateful.

Agree

Is there a petition to say Andrew should be made to go to the USA and be a witness, pay his own legal bills and have his security withdrawn completely?

@Blossomtoes

Blair made his own choice

Endorsed by a cross party majority Commons vote. It was a collective decision.

I meant he made his own choice to back Bush. After that he and Campbell did everything they could to get it through the HoC. It was a collective decision made in the belief that a PM wouldn't manufacture evidence to take the country into war. Unfortunately Blair and Campbell didn't play by those rules.

@madisonbridges

I don't believe Saddam had WMD (in 2003), obviously he did not, my point is that Blair was in an awful position... believe Blix, who had no evidence that there were none and risk SH then using them else where, sure in the knowledge the West wouldn't act against him.

Or support the USA... knowing Blix maybe correct.

What possible motive could Blair have to seek a war knowing it was based on a pack of lies?

In regard to Bush, that was in reply to yourself and others stating how many Iraqis died, Bush was going to invade regardless of Blair & it shouldn't be forgotten how many people SH killed

After that he and Campbell did everything they could to get it through the HoC
It was a collective decision made in the belief that a PM wouldn't manufacture evidence to take the country into war. Unfortunately Blair and Campbell didn't play by those rules

...or Blair believed the intel from the USA and thought he was acting in the best interests of the UK?

Chillcot cleared Blair of lying to Parliament.

All pm's have been lying s#£*bags. They got a knighthood- I don't think any deserve them, theres always some conspiracy or other entanglement with politicians.

People like Chris whitty- they do deserve celebrating. selfless contribution to the country,

I think it is marvellous news and about time too.

One of the most successful PMs in decades and the most successful Labour Leader in the history of the party.

I assumed they had given it to him because they can't give Gordon Brown a knighthood without giving Blair one first.

[quote Alexandra2001]@madisonbridges

I don't believe Saddam had WMD (in 2003), obviously he did not, my point is that Blair was in an awful position... believe Blix, who had no evidence that there were none and risk SH then using them else where, sure in the knowledge the West wouldn't act against him.

Or support the USA... knowing Blix maybe correct.

What possible motive could Blair have to seek a war knowing it was based on a pack of lies?

In regard to Bush, that was in reply to yourself and others stating how many Iraqis died, Bush was going to invade regardless of Blair & it shouldn't be forgotten how many people SH killed[/quote]
The UN had been going into Iraq since 1991. They were sure by 1995 that there were no WMD. (Too long to explain why they were sure) Blix went into Iraq for months. Security services for different countries advised places to look. There were never any found. Because, as we know 100% now, there weren't any to find. Blix was adamant that there were none to be found. Are you saying that if we think a country has biological weapons and they might use them against us so we can just attack them? Because if that's your argument, I guess you support war with Russia. If you believe some countries with nuclear capabilities threaten our lives, I guess you support going into North Korea. Lets not kid ourselves, we went into Iraq because it was easy to beat.

What possible motive could Blair have to seek a war knowing it was based on a pack of lies?
Blair said it was important to stand side by side with usa and show a united front. But let's say that he did believe there were WMDs, does that make it OK to falsify evidence to win a vote? If he believed it was true, on what evidence was he basing that belief? Why not just state that?

The fact is he was told by experts there was no evidence, he falsified evidence and then the Americans used that evidence to claim to the world that here was evidence of WMD. So if the Americans were using his non-existent evidence, Blair must have known they had no evidence of their own.

Graham Greene would have been proud to have that as a plot!

@Motherdare

I think he did a lot of harm to this country. We are still reeling from the effects of his open-door immigration policy. He presided over and encouraged a very welfare-dependent society which will have implications for generations to come. He dragged us into a phoney war.

That said, don’t all PMs get knighted eventually?

Wow! You must be very snobby!

@Pirrip1

What good did John Major do? He has a knighthood.

What good did Margaret Thatcher do? She was made a Baroness.

What good did Churchill do? He sent plenty of squaddies to their death. He was knighted when he retired.

This. And Ted Heath was a much whispered-about possible nonce and Jimmy Saville was a known sexual predator. They were both knighted too 🤷🏼‍♀️ It’s not these people receiving the titles that is wrong, it’s that the titles exist in this way and age which is wrong. Get rid of the titles and it won’t be an issue anymore. Get rid of the monarchy while we are at it.

@Mummyrowland

How can you support himnifnyour husband is a squaddie? I deal with fall out from this day to day and could never support him

You sound very angry. You need to learn to let things go or you would never move on.

@Alexandra2001

After that he and Campbell did everything they could to get it through the HoC It was a collective decision made in the belief that a PM wouldn't manufacture evidence to take the country into war. Unfortunately Blair and Campbell didn't play by those rules

...or Blair believed the intel from the USA and thought he was acting in the best interests of the UK?

Chillcot cleared Blair of lying to Parliament.

No, the usa was using Blairs evidence - remember the plagiarised student thesis? - to convince the world.

SureStart centres - the whole scheme was actually brilliant and should never have been reduced to what it is today.

@Pat123dev

All pm's have been lying s#£*bags. They got a knighthood- I don't think any deserve them, theres always some conspiracy or other entanglement with politicians.

People like Chris whitty- they do deserve celebrating. selfless contribution to the country,

Sorry this is such lazy thinking. PMs have varied in quality and moral character, but with a few notable exceptions all have an opinion on what would make the country better and examples can be found of policies they implement to achieve. All have events outside their control that hinder them and all make mistakes. To say they're all lying shitbags is nonsense (until we get to Johnson, obviously).

Look at the list of Blair's policies and achievements posted by a PP. Life was demonstrably better under him for many many people, and it is clear reading through the list that he had a vision for Britain that had its people and their lives at its heart.

I was in Iraq and I can’t count the number of times the chemical sensor alarms went off. You may have also heard of Gulf War syndrome.

But the Tories have done a good number with this, bearing in mind their manipulation of the working class (many average squaddies).

What I remember is Public Services picked up, working people supported and fucking Tories out.

[quote Mandy63l]@wecando no, it’s Maggie. 🙈

Blair’s Labour Government did achieve a lot, and delivered on many of their promises, but ultimately he is a war criminal and should not be honoured on that basis.

Saville raised staggering amounts of money for charity, yet he was a paedophile. We don’t keep him on a pedestal now we know of his heinous crimes, so why should we worship Blair?[/quote]
It's a myth that Saville raised staggering amounts for charity. When it was fully audited the actual amounts raised were a fraction of the headline figures due to the creative accounting and his extortionate expenses claimed for raising the money. The organisations involved kept this quiet until after his death as it was embarrassing for them. While he was alive the perception he was 'doing good' and raising their charities profile was worth the relatively low net charity worth. After the revelations... they could jump on the bandwagon of being 'done over' by a manipulative and deceitful monster. The thing is they knew, they knew he didn't raise anywhere near what they wanted to believe, and they knew he was a wrong 'un.
Sorry to go a bit off topic but it's something that does annoy me!

We had a theory that his knighthood was delayed while Prince Phillip was alive (wasn’t there some argy bargy between them about Diana’s funeral?)