Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Chilcot Iraq Enquiry.

weltweit said:
Lord Guthrie has claimed Brown did not tell the truth in front of the Chillcott enquiry.

Specifically he does not agree that no demands from the Army were turned down.

The defence secretary has said that Guthrie has issues with Gordon Brown.
Click to expand...
Rawnsley's book make's clear that Blair was too scared to ask him about this, telling a general or someone to go and speak to Brown direct if he wanted to ask for £'s, and the military man pointing out that this was fundamentally Blair's role but being unable to persuade him otherwise.

so he hasn't lied as much as told the truth about his understanding of a specific scenario (allbeit, repeated apparently at regular intervals) rather than a thought-through strategy, which is what politics is about essentially as far as nu-lab is concerned it seems.

so he didn't refuse them, cos they were unable or unwilling to make direct demands to him, so he didn't turn anybody down.
 
Paulie Tandoori said:
Rawnsley's book make's clear that Blair was too scared to ask him about this, telling a general or someone to go and speak to Brown direct if he wanted to ask for £'s, and the military man pointing out that this was fundamentally Blair's role but being unable to persuade him otherwise.

so he hasn't lied as much as told the truth about his understanding of a specific scenario (allbeit, repeated apparently at regular intervals) rather than a thought-through strategy, which is what politics is about essentially as far as nu-lab is concerned it seems.

so he didn't refuse them, cos they were unable or unwilling to make direct demands to him, so he didn't turn anybody down.
Click to expand...

That is certainly interesting.

But did the forces not get things they needed while Brown was Chancellor? Perhaps that is a better question which Brown might not find so easy to evade? it seems they did not, especially if we are to believe the stories of squaddies buying their own body armour etc ..
 
At Blair's second appearance, he said he "profoundly regretted the loss of life" ....

Is that an apology?
 
And he used his second appearance to emphasise that Iran must be dealt with, if necessary with force!
 
I'd pretty much call that unrepentant. They should keep him longer...every day probably costs him money on the high end speaking circuit.
 
A bit embarrassing really..still spouting that same old shit. In a way he was the definition of the emperor with no clothes.
 
weltweit said:
So, Gordon Brown has been in front of the Chillcott enquiry today.

he has apparently said:

1) The decision to go into Iraq was right and taken for the right reasons.

2) The budget for defence was never restricted, the army was never denied anything they requested!

Does anyone believe him?
Click to expand...

Oh come off it:mad:.Logistics for the war were shite mainly because Brown wouldn't release funds and Hoon wouldn't buy stuff early enough for it too be ready for the war.As they didn't want anyone to know they had already decided to have it.If your going to fight a war and it really should be the last option do it properly or not at all.
This was a war we didn't have to fight and it was planned badly and the aftermath was even worse.
 
if you read Bob Woodward's State of Denial, US State dept and UK Overseas Development did quite a bit of planning on what to do after the invasion, (which in itself seemed to go quite smoothly) Rumsfeld binned it just before the invasion. Which given the reasoning for UK involvement -to help steer US lead future development meant we failed before we started. Hopefully that will come out. Stuff about Saddam still being there brutalising his own people if we hadn't gone in IS COMPLETE BOLLOCKS -3 US divisions beyond UK control would have gone in anyway and done the job in about the same time frame. The media should haul them up on that. It was always about our relationship with the US and the UN.
As to the legality, I think it highly unlikely that the British establishment will put a report in print that potentialy makes things harder for the poor bastards who actually went over there and did the job. Nuremberg trials showed "only following orders" is no real defense. So out of respect to the duty of care to the troops Blair will get away with it
 
weltweit said:
1) The decision to go into Iraq was right and taken for the right reasons.

2) The budget for defence was never restricted, the army was never denied anything they requested!

Does anyone believe him?
Click to expand...

Ha what a load of bollocks, 1 is such shite I think nobody seriously believes it anymore and 2!!!!!! they may not have denied any requests but due to the fucked up procurement system they had at the time, by the time equipment was received the ones who requested it were on their way back to the UK. I had desert combats and boots there only because I went out and bought them myself, the system apparently got better with time but only after it was even obvious to the fuckwit with his hand on the pursestrings that it wasn't working.
 
weltweit said:
..Blair and Brown and funding the military eh !!
Click to expand...

my 'desert boots' melted in the, umm... desert. i rolled off the start line wearing Merrell trainers. i had body armour, but not the HV plates that stop bullets, and i didn't have a desert pattern helmet cover - so my dark green kevlar helmet got spray painted. i looked like a fucking journo. or the Iraqi Army...

you've probably heard of 'Urgent Operational Requirement' - its a quick way of buying stuff you identify you need. you have to make a case to MOD, they either accept it or bin it (there was a time limit for decisions, different limit for different types of kit, but some of them went through in days), but if they accept it they hit the shops with the HM Treasury credit card - no tendering process, no endless studies, no penny pinching at all. just straight to the suppliers and 'i need X, the company that can give it me in Y weeks gets the money..'.

anyway, you'll hear Blair and Brown say - apparently with some pride - that every UOR that was approved by MOD was funded by HMT, no quibbles, no 'fucking how much?!!!' - well, there's a story behind that. like the furore over the availability of Helicopters, the truth is rather less clear cut than either would like their biographers to write about: we were given everything we asked for, however we were ordered not to ask for certain things because it would be embarrassing that we didn't already have them, or because Brown refused to stump up the cash and St. Tone refused to over-rule him.

i would genuinely like to see his head on a stick outside the Tower of London and all his wealth subject to an Act of Attainder.
 
weltweit said:
Taking their time it seems.

Now not going to be published until after the election.
Click to expand...

:hmm: (at them that is)

am i being over-cynical?

i'm now wondering what there is that could embarrass the tories. i'd have thought it would suit them fairly well to get it out before the election...
 
Puddy_Tat said:
.. i'm now wondering what there is that could embarrass the tories. i'd have thought it would suit them fairly well to get it out before the election...
Click to expand...
Yes it is an interesting thing to think about, I would have thought Blair et al would have more to fear.
 
Its not political per say, its process. All involved got sent a draft and quite a few people have rung their lawyers from what I've read.
 
gosub said:
Its not political per say, its process. All involved got sent a draft and quite a few people have rung their lawyers from what I've read.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately British gun laws do not allow the lawyers to suggest the glass of brandy and the revolver in the library solution.
 
I have heard bleats from Blair a few times today claiming it is not him that is delaying publication of the report. Smoke & fire ..
 
weltweit said:
I have heard bleats from Blair a few times today claiming it is not him that is delaying publication of the report. Smoke & fire ..
Click to expand...
I doubt he is, none of the big parties have any interest in stirring memories of that disgraceful time. It would only help the parties who were against the Iraq war, in the upcoming election.
 
weltweit said:
I have heard bleats from Blair a few times today claiming it is not him that is delaying publication of the report. Smoke & fire ..
Click to expand...

Blair might be the designated villain for this farce, but there's lots of people who will be heavily criticised in this report - and most of them can afford lawyers for long enough to kick this into long enough grass that no one will care what the report says when it eventually surfaces.
 
I thought this was a waste of money when they announced it and the fact is seems people who gave evidence can delay it being published indefinitely hasn't really changed my mind.
 
So now the victims' relatives are threatening legal action because of the delay in issuing the report.
 
Getting to be a bit of a joke now. The Maxwellisation process began years ago, what on earth can be delaying the report now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kebabking
British soldier killed in Iraq, 11/03/20
Replies
19
Views
4K
butchersapron
B
cupid_stunt
Directory enquiries costing up to £20 for a 90 second call!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Replies
29
Views
696
treelover
T
likesfish
Historical Iraq abuse investigation
Replies
2
Views
408
likesfish
likesfish
teqniq
Undercover policing enquiry
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
886
Views
61K
DaveCinzano
DaveCinzano
likesfish
AL sweady inquiry enquiry complete
Replies
23
Views
1K
likesfish
likesfish
Back
Top Bottom