War criminal Tony Blair to be given most senior knighthood in new year honours list

If my aunt had a schlong she'd be my uncle.

Iraq was being led by a murderous dictator who was gassing to death his countrymen women and children.

1000's of Iraqi's had their heads chopped off at his command. He needed taking out for war crimes.

Blair facilitated this and I have no problem with it.

And that Iraqi leader who was gassing civilians was backed by Reagan and Thatcher. So why weren’t they hauled off for complicity of his crimes? Why don’t the media mention their part in his crimes when they discuss their legacies? Bit too inconvenient I guess because the media weren’t complaint too at the time. (Bar ITN who exposed Saddam gassing humans and the Western backing for it).

Reagan and Thatcher had a lot more to answer for than Blair. Thatcher especially.

In response to the OP, This is a Mockery of the once heralded honour.

The US protected Saddam from war crimes charges that’s why they get a special mention. Without them blocking Iran’s legal action, a lot of lives would have been saved.

I’m fully aware of the wrongs of other nations, but I’ve no idea why you’re pretending the US is being victimised here for their part in Saddam’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.

IN terms of foreign policy, maybe; but not domestically. She'll aways be remembered for the miners strike and the poll tax riots.

I spotted that there is an online petition for it to be taken back. Thousands have signed it, up to 200,000 in a day.

I don't think Blair ever considered him a western ally. Reagan and Thatcher did though. That's the whole point see.

The Labour party raised it in Parliament but were told "Saddam was an ally" by Thatcher's regime.

That's the point: you're supposed to govern for eveyone, not just the rich. That mistake left her legacy one of violent uprising in the streets.

They served three terms - and at some point next year, they'll have been out of office for longer than they were in it. It wasn't long-term success. And they were literally nothing more than a clean and nice version of the Tories. They bore no resemblance whatsoever to a party of the left. It wasn't for nothing that Thatcher described Tony Blair as her greatest achievement. Once the Tories cleaned themselves up and shifted towards the centre ground, they went back into power and have yet to lose it. The closest Labour came to winning an election was in 2017, having moved back towards a left-leaning position under Corbyn. Without all the smears, they probably would've won. Now they're being led by a sort of 'Blair-lite' bland centrist, they're floundering. And they'll continue to flounder until the electorate has a distinct reason to vote for them instead of the Tories.

Do you understand the concept of nuance? The nature of how he achieved that success placed Labour in a position where, once the Tories got their act together, there would be little difference between the two parties. That's not to say that Labour won't inevitably return to power some day, but they're relying on Johnson or his successors destroying the Tories first. It's no coincidence that Labour's best post-2010 election result in 2017 (actually their highest share of the vote since 2001) came after the party shifted towards a left-leaning position (i.e. they differentiated themselves from the Tories).