Some how the United States and Great Britain must regain the faith and trust of the rest of the world.

I would like to see a mock trail. But most importantly the laws governing the trail must be retroactive as were the quasi laws of the Nuremberg affair.

We in the English Speaking world can not put German Speakers or French Speaker in exile, to death or in prison when we win a war. We must be above all of that. Winning its self requires that we look at every minutia of evidence, both positive and negative, that lead to our war of aggression.

If the verdict of a mock trail it guilty International Law must be changed in regard to wars of aggressions.

Lastly to the non English Speaking World I would like to say we have been trying to dominate the world since 1918 and we are wrong!

Dean, Dallas, Estado de Texas

Thank you Mr. Blair, thank you and George Bush. If not for you two there would be now war in Iraq. Just imagine, what a terrible thought. Half a million civilians would not be dead. Thanks again and God bless you.

Y.K.H. Moxey, Toronto, Canada

Tony Blair,your evil war has killed thousands of innocent people and made many more to become refugees in their own country and in neioghbouring States. No way can you redeem yourself . Becoming a Catholic is not going to save you from your sinful deeds.You will pay for it in one way or another ..Getting rid of Saddam Hussein could have achieved without going to war .Killing innocent people in Iraq in the name of Terrorism has been totally wrong as Iraq dinot export terrorists,all they had was an wicked Dictator.. You actions have put Britain on the danger list from terrorism and you will have to answer for what has happened so far and we don't know what is in stock.!

Bala Superamaniam, Sydney, Australia

"Tony Blair: 'I wanted war -- it was the right thing to do'"

"Iraq: 'I had no wmd and was not a threat to any country'

Price Iraq paid:
1) over 500,000 dead
2) over 2-4 million displaced
3) countrys infrastructure totally destroyed
4) it's oil resources under threat
5) creation of Sunni, Shiite and Kurds internal war.

Price west paid:
1) hundred fold increase in terrorism
2) intense hatred from Islamic world
3) possible path to nuclearization of middle east
4) arab/muslim worlds ties moving towards Russia/China
5) Iran's influence in Iraq
6) mistrust of US/UK/Israel throughout the world

Gain: Israel's dominance in the middle east
Thank you Mr Blair!

Awaiting justice for Iraq...

Mohammed, London, UK

It's quite clear to me (and with hindsight, of course) that for both Bush and Blair the motivation for war was self-interest rather than national interest. In the case of George Bush, the record high oil prices must be making him very very rich. In the case of Blair, well, by the way, Tony, how is that job in Palestine going?

Jim Oliver, Syston,

Strange that Rosie Smyth, Canterbury and Samuel Young, Paris have exactly the same message of support for TB. Could this be the spin machine working again? As for the comments from the US, having lived and worked there during the Iraq conflict I know first hand that most Americans do not even have a clue where Iraq is situated. Jay Leno and David Letterman proved this!. So what right has the US to attack a country halfway round the world from them. And please do not try to justify it with the Al Queda crap as Saddam Hussein was an enemy of Al Queda.

George, glasgow, uk

So much for being a Christian, Mr Blair.

Clive, Epsom, England

I have to disagree with the comments made, yes delusional to think that Saddam Hussien was a not clear and present threat to the region... He clearly showed it by invading Kuwait and massacring ten of thousands of his own people... Yes it probably was a mistake to invade Iraq... But having listened to Blair explain his reasons for decisions that where made during the build up to the Iraq war, one has to respect the decision... We live in a country where democracy is very much a corner stone of our society and unfortunately in many countries they do not have the ability to vote.... People have a very short memory of the lunatics that flew 2 planes into the World Trade Centre this is an example of the lengths that these people will goto if given a chance... Whether the threat comes from fundamentalists or countries it's not right to sit by and allow them to become a threat human civilisation... To comparing this situation to Hitler and Pol Pot is naive to say the least....

Ronin, London, England

iraq is invaded on spurious grounds based on nothing but lies and deceit. how many iraqs have died because of the war. ive heard a figure of over one million. the leader of the country killed for "his crimes" by the invading parties. when will they be called to account. i believe that there are heads of states at the present as bad as, or worse than, s.h. only problem i can see is no oil in those countries.

stephen baron, leith, tasmania

In view of this statement we should anticipate a Guilty Plea to his future trial for war crimes. After all other leaders have been tried as criminals for starting wars.

Neil, Gloucestershire, England

To those comparing the iraq "invasion" of Kuwait with the US/UK one of Iraq.
Dont let your patriotism confuse the real history.
After WWII the allies cleary TOOK the state of kuwait from iraq, the same as china coming along and taking california from the US, installed a pro western monarch who would sell it cheap oil and give it land for a military base. Iraq (using US made and sold weaponary)believed it was simply taking back what was rightfully theres for 1000+ years!
the US invasion of Iraq was completely illegal under any law in any country at any time in modern history. Hopefully historians record the truth behind the current mess and not paint it as a western Vs middle eastern clash of ideologies.

Luke, perth, australia

Henry - Interesting question about international law. The horrific and brutal invasion by NATO of the Kosovo region met all of the criteria that you state.
And yet, poor Mr. Milosevic was the one who ended up in the international court. Just like Saddam Hussein - another innocent victim of the USA/British war criminal fraternity.

arnoldo, Coventry,

I don't like Blair one bit the war was the right decision.
The screw up is that Bush and Blair didn’t have a plan for the occupation.
They rushed in rather than plan, plan.

Bush and Blair’s war was wrong, but war was the answer

Phill Barlow, The Wirral, England

Tony Blair disgusts me.

Richard, Plymouth, UK

"This makes him totally and inexorably culpable for every death and injury of every British soldier in the Iraq scenario."

What about Al Qaeda in Iraq? What about the people who plant the roadside bombs and fire the rocket-propelled grenades? They're innocent, are they? Blair never deliberately killed anyone, never mind innocent civilians.

"The war (Iraq) was against international law what ever the grounds. If [you] do not have respect for the law then you are lawless."

This is a non-argument. Following international law is not necessarily the right thing to do. Saddam tortured and killed many innocent people, and Blair genuinely thought he was working on weapons of mass destruction.

Ed, London,

There are real problems with your interpretation of international law, Terence. Let's start with the obvious ones.
1. International Law is not equivalent to national laws, or even legal treaties between nations. In short, it is not binding or bound by sanction.
2. The current definitions of international law were drawn up in the 1940s in an era of imperial government and of far greater internal repression across the world. A legal doctrine of interventionism could never have been promogulated in a world containing the Soviet Union and today China.

So, if we are taking a sovereign view of international law then the nation state is entitled to commit whatever atrocities, crimes etc within its borders - provided that these do not spill over.
However, in doing so we violate the UN Declaration of Human Rights. So how do we protect human rights? Well the UN is not the place to do so.
Do you seriously expect the dictators and autocrats of the world to respect human rights and law?

Richard, Norwich,

"""One word...NUMPTY!"; TJ, Greenock, Scotland""

Now there's a word you don't see in print too often these days. An accurate word, but a rare one.

"""Miloshovic belived he was right, Pol Pot belived they were right. Hitler believed he was right."; sandy, Victoria""

True, but don't forget - they didn't win. Even more so, not only didn't they win, they lost. The odds on the US/UK forces "losing" in Iraq are slim to none. The odds on the US/UK forces not winning are significantly higher.

The Universal Curmudgeon, Vancouver, Canada

Speaking as an atheist, what else could you have expected from Blair; he was and is a devout Christian (when it suits him).

Stephen , Hounslow, UK

If Blair really thought that Saddam was hiding weapons or weapons programmes, and to disarm Saddam was the true purpose of the invasion, why did he never show any anxiety - following the invasion - that no weapons or weapons programmes were found?

When Hans Blix announced that his inspectors had been unable to find evidence of the presence of either, Blair's reaction was that Iraq would have to be invaded as it was obvious that Saddam was hiding the weapons.

For someone who has insisted that every decision he has taken has been 'the right thing to do', that reaction alone seems to be a particularly dishonest one to have made.

Philip Skalla, London, England

I for one completely agree with Tony Blair... He was absolutely right to goto war and i'm glad he has stuck by his convictions...

Good on you Tony!

Jim , London, England

Thankfully we live in a democratic country where people can agree and disagree with decisions that are made.. and as a result we can choose who leads this country... Tony led this country with distinction throughout his premiership and i admire the fact he has stood by his decisions... If it wasn't for Tony Blair, Milosevic and Saddam Hussein would probably be still in power and slaughtering their own people... and Sierra Leone would still be in anarchy....

James, London, England

I find the unbalanced nature of this debate quite distastful on this comment board.... We have a Prime Minister who led the Country with honour and distinction and an elected PM in a democratic country... and had the moral high ground to stand by his convictions... Yes may not have been right going to war but at least had the bottle to stand by that decision through what must of been extremely difficult period for him and his family... I respect tony for what he has done for this country and history will show in years to come why the decisions he made where not only brave but justfied....

Natasha, Tunbridge Wells, England

What have the British people gained by TB's following Bush in to war in Iraq? Are the Iraqi people better off? Is the region or the world or the UK a safer place? These are the only real questions left. If as he says, he believed it was "the right thing to do", why? For as I think of the above questions my answers are; worse security, definately no and definately no. His statement smacks of a faith-based decision, or a 'hunch'. That would be frightening. Of course Saddam was a monster, but TB's decision, seemingly alone, to go to war with the US and his pathetic and crass need for vindication, (viz the dodgy dossier which led to the suicide of David Kelly and promotion of incompetance), was I think an appalling Prime Ministerial decision. What amazes me is that he hung so long, why weren't the voters as outraged as I was? So again Tony, why do you think it was the right thing to do? The answer I fear would just be a vacuum.

pip willis, Sydney,

So finally he's told the truth - he was nobody's poodle, he wasnt reluctant, he didn't listen to advice, he alone drove the whole damn thing.

So much then for that coterie of pious biographers that surrounded him. So much for those who believed that he'd been overwhelmed by Washington.

Like Toad he's not sorry and he'd do it all again. This final shamelessness, this grandiosity, this lack of conscience for the catastrophe which ensued a grim confirmation of the worst case diagnosis of Blair's mentality.

Bob T, London, UK

So Blair is a war criminal. Now what?
Robert Gates, US Minister of Defence, is a terrorist who, in his CIA job, had merchant ships blown out of the water in Nicaragua.
UK will never quite catch up with the U.S. of A.

Anatoly Panov, Moscow,

Blair was eager to take Britain to war with the hopes that this would cement a close and permanent relationship with the US at the exclusion of any other European nation. He would rather see his country in a subservient junior partnership with the US than being the lesser of the three top leaders within the EU. His opportunistic attempt to secure a lasting and influential place for Britain withing America's empire ended in resounding failure.

Andrew, San Francisco, USA

How many people all over the world are asking themselves if it would be "the right thing to do" if somebody decided arbitrarily to bomb America and Britain?

Ronald E. Watts, Nicosia , Cyprus

By his own admission, David Aaronovitch no longer believes a single word Tony Blair has to say:

"If nothing is eventually found, I - as a supporter of the war - will never believe another thing that I am told by our government, or that of the US ever again. And, more to the point, neither will anyone else. Those weapons had better be there somewhere." (David Aaronovitch, The Guardian, April 29 2003)

David Cromwell, Southampton,

What is this, confession before before becoming Catholic? Repenting his sins? God may forgive him but many mortals will not.

Wen, Oxford,

he should be indicted for war crimes

paul marrotte, barcelona, catalunya

"I have full respect for what he has done, which was to stop a madman dictator killing more people" -- Laszlo, Staines, Middlesex

Sir, I'm pretty certain that more people have already died and been displaced from Iraq war then Saddam had killed during his reign. You must remember this ongoing conflict ignited by the west, between different Iraqi tribes will last for over fifty years. The estimated total count in loss of life and infrastructure will be much much worse, then Saddam could have ever achieved.

Mohammed, London, UK

See you at the Hague Princess.

Mark Gobell, Ware, Herts,

If they had a proper plan on what to do after they invaded , then this soo would'nt be a issue.

Chetas Patel, croydon, surrey

It takes a lot of guts to do what this man has done. Mr Blair stood up to the ugly face of adversity and chopped it off. I have full respect for what he has done, which was to stop a madman dictator killing more people.

Laszlo, Staines, Middlesex

IN answer to Mark Antrim, Ireland.

By the fact that, there is no proper way to have manage a war such as Iraq, as evidenced by Cheney himself during a 90's interview, in where he points out the entire flaws of such an occupation, then there is no confusion, the invasion itself was wrong and as others have said illegal.

Paul Sanders, New York, USA

Several facts should not be lost in assessing Blair's legacy with Iraq
1. Saddam's regime killed in excess of 100,000 Iraqi's -mostly Shia or Kurd.
2. He was the aggressor in Kuwait and Iran.
3. He was in contravention of half a dozen UN resolutions.
Historical analysis written 20 or 30 years may well have a different view of the events and ultimate impact on Middle Eastern politics than the very polarised views expressed by these commentators

Geoff, Macclesfield, England

If Blair had published the full dossier, rather than the abridged sexed-up version, he would not have got it through Parliament.
He knew prior to the war that there was no strategy for post-war re-build. He knew from Hans Blix that it was unlikely that WMD still existed- Blix asked for an additional two months to finish his work in Iraq.

So it was regime change - and oil of course.
Unlike the U.S., the U.K is a signatory to the Hague convention. Blair should be arranged before the court for the crimes that he committed, both before and after the invasion.
Blair , via his aides has hinted that he should become the first President of Europe. For the sake of what is left of the reputation of the U.K. this should not happen.
Perhaps an e-petition on the Downing street website is needed for the people of the U.K. to express their disapproval. I would- but I am no longer in the U.K. - Driven out by Blair's policies.

Michael Lacy, Montpellier, France

I was living in a small village in Spain at the time and I knew that there was no 45 minute nuclear threat. Saddam had waged his war before and knew that the world was looking for an excuse to invade. He might have held and iron fist on his people, but like Tito (Yugoslavia) he kept them from killing each other. So, if little old me knew that Saddam was staying out of trouble how come all this intelligence gathering was SOOOOO FAR off the mark? Becasue it was all a big lie. And the fool Blair says that he still believes. That is rubbish. What about North Korea then. They are further down the nuclear road than Iraq ever was and Iran for that matter. Why don't we invade them as well.? It's because George bush wanted that oil and his daddy had his nose pushed out by Saddam a decade earlier. We are controlled and manipulated (the Americans more than most) by by the few.

David, Madrid,

Blairs' attitude and arrogant posturing fill me with anger.
He admits openly that his evidence was flawed and that he ignored the advice of his senior aids; and decided, based on his judgement and, as I recall, guidance from God to launch this country into a shameful conflict with the subsequent loss of life etc.
Why is Blair able to get away with this, still hold a senior position and now gain financialy from this, through books, speaking etc.
Shame.

Craig, Kingsbridge, Devon

The most serious aspect of this admission is that it proves that Blair is profoundly undemocratic.

His job as PM in a democracy is to do the bidding of his electorate, the majority of whom did not want their country engaging in an illegal war of aggression. Yet Blair is seen to have acted in despotic manner, as in a totalitarian dicatorship such as N. Korea.

David Sketchley, Seville, Spain

The ONLY point of the illegal attack on Iraq was revenge for
9/11. Pundits can jabber on about oil, or weapons of mass destruction, or Saddam's sons, or the gassing of Kurds until the cows come home, but the REAL reason for Iraq was to restore American pride after it had been dragged bloodied and broken across the world's TV screens night after night. Iraq was hit purely for shock and awe, to show the world that America was still invincible. That's why the neocons didn't care less about the looting afterwards or the chaos that ensued.

Mike Mitchell, Spalding, England

Maybe Mr Blair should also explain why it was the right thing to do to refuse to give British troops the equipment they desperately needed to save many lives, at a time when Mr Blair was enriching many of his labour hacks and trade union cronies by pouring vast sums of public money into giving them fat cat non-jobs in non performing Quangos.

Doug, Glasgow,

War criminal? Some of you need to stop overstating your (weak) arguments with provocative language like this.

I was pro the invasion and I am still very pro the continuation of the work being done in Iraq. I am however very critical too and for the following reasons:

1. There was too much spin and disinformation. It was never a viable concept that we were in immediate danger from Saddam. Danger yes, but not immediate.
2. There was clearly no post regime change plan. This is unforgivable and caused far more misery and bloodshed than was necessary.
3. I resent individuals like Blair and Bush speaking about religion as if their god is on their side. And that leads me on to my reasons for the war:

This is all about a larger war against Islamic and other religious fascists. The benefit of this invasion is that it draws these nuts from all over the Middle East. When they arrive they can be destroyed in one place. It is just a shame that they decide to take innocent people with them.

Rob, London, UK

About the 45 minutes: if Blair really thought that Iraq could attack Britain or British forces within 45 minutes, how did he manage to convince the British public and parliament that we needed to invade Iraq in order to prevent such an attack?

After all, it would take far longer than 45 minutes to invade Iraq, let alone take over the country.

Blair and Bush achieved mass support for their actions by employing the power of suggestion.

Philip Skalla, London, England

Chirac was right.
Blair was wrong.
For once...

Pierre75, Paris, France

not only was war to his fancy, he also agreed to fix the facts to fit the policy, manufacture evidence, and deceive the world (those foolish enough to believe the neocons) into setting off the destruction of the middle east. (i thought he was well-read, unlike bush. did he not know the history of the middle east and of anglo-american tampering in it?) like bush and cheney and the neocons, blair is a war criminal and should be tried for it.

LatAm, Washington, DC,

It's a shame the amount of violence against civilian has occurred since the start of the war, but I find it dubious that people only now talk about them. Those same people could care less about the innocent Iraqis when Saddam was ruling with an iron fist and the sanctions were being exploited by almost everyone. At the very least the U.S and U.K tried to bring some degree of hope to that region; at worst the failure to adequately plan after the invasion reinforced the deep schism between the Sunni and Shiites. However to clear up some misconception; Just because Bush and Blair did not seek "approval" from the U.N does not make the war "illegal".

Leo, Exton, PA

"Give them a year or two more to get things cleaned up a bit and then ask them if they think the war was worth it."
George, San Jose,
I would imagine that the some of 100,00 dead Iraqis may have another opinion as would some of the 4100 dead US and UK troops. And that doesn't even include those whose lives have been destroyed by injuries.
In the time that this occupation has being going on WWII had started and finished
It is peculiar that most Americans think Blair is wonderful.
I wish thay would take him and keep him.

Bernard Mahan, Edinburgh, Scotland

Hurray for Bush's puppy Blair.......he wanted a war that he's too old to fight as well. Weapons of Mass Destruction?

With the lousy world economy, high gas prices, increasing terrorism .... I guess we should all thank Tony and George for their great insight as arrogant " world leaders" and trying to save us from ourselves.

Will, seattle, us/washington

Blair was wrong then and is still wrong now. He should have followed the advice of his cabinet and close advisors, but Blair wanted and rushed into war agaisnt Iraq. His self righteousness and arrogance hurt him and people who trusted him. I hope he will soon come to senses and shoud feel sorry and guilty for all the soldiers and innocent people killed or injured in this unjust war.

Anton, Kingston, Ont., Canada

Blair is one reason why people today lack any moral sense of personal responsibility - In the past if a politician made such a huge error in judgement he would fall on his sword and resign immediately - people now hang on by their fingernals till the last possible moment trying to justify the unjustifiable; the ducking and diving brigade epitomised by Blair; when politicians themselves are such bad role models what hope is there for the rest of society.

Clive, London,

Of course Tony and George are not sorry about invading an independent state for reasons which turn out to be false. It's always been about Big Oil and it's just that the plan isn't working out too well at the moment. But I suspect that both George and Tony will keep the faith and will be well looked after, in any case.

Paul, Kitchener, Canada

"1) Madmen like Saddam don't do peace people, ask the Kurds and Kuwaitis.

2) Don't confuse the mess today, caused by gross mishandling of the aftermath of the invasion. YES, Bush and Blair do have to answer for that! (or should that be Halliburton and Cheney?)

Mark, Antrim, Ireland"

1) With chemicals and delivery systems sold and supplied by the UK and US.

What toppled Saddam was changing the oil bourse to Euros, the US could little afford to lose the Iraqi oil revenue from the black market oil trading going on and both Britain and the US were hurt financially when he changed the bourse.

But Bush, is learning the same lesson that Hitler did with Russian oil, that it would have been easier just to keep buying it instead of stealing it.

One of the very first things the US did was to illegally change the oil bourse back to dollars AND to secure oil facilities before anything else.

And like Hitler in Russia, the US has pumped very little oil since occupation.

Ian Watson, Dorset, UK

Mr. Blair ought to make another trip to the Banquetting House with or without Bush, preferrably with, but not for dinner.

Jack Jersawitz, Atlanta, Georgia

Come on, stop blaming Blair, at least he acted as if he was given a choice, and he preserved the image of his country.

Laurent, Angers,

War Criminal!

Mark, Bton, Uk

Feeling guilty Mr.Blair, you should be. Do not try and justify your position, the both of you acted like the Dictator you were trying to get rid off. At the end of the day you have a lot of innocent people's & soldiers blood on your hands and I hope you spend the rest of your life troubled with what you have done and ask yourself this WAS IT WORTH IT.

lynden hall, Kettering, Northants

Blair is sadly typical lof so many of our modern-day crop of professional politicians. Their aim in life from an early age is power through politics, to which end their intermediate career path (often the law) is but a step along the way. They have never served their country in any manner other than by seeking personal advancement, and only a tiny percentage has ever worn a uniform or placed themselves in anything resembling a degree of danger. From this perspective Blair and his like plunge the country and its underpaid, under-appreciated armed forces into danger on little more than a whim, or a personal judgement of 'their place in history'. At least Maggie was well served by senior ministers who fully understood what they were contemplating at the time of the Falklands.

Tony Adams, Deal, Kent

But would he send his own sons to fight for ( What he believed in ) answer NO!!!

John, Clacton on Sea-Essex, UK

Blair indulged himself then? I pity the man because he doesn't seem to question himself in circumstances where he really should. Only the very foolish would go to war without serious misgivings and soul-searching. Mr Blair, I fear, is tragic hero and a fool of epic proportions.

There is much that I admire about Tony Blair but he strikes me as being altogether too blase about the consequences of going to war and the precedent that this set. He appears to me to have satisfied any doubts that he may have had all too easily. The standards that he sets for himself appear to be somewhat lower than one would hope for from a British PM.

I hope that one day he will find himself before an international court. It would be in the interest of the West, the Islamic world and ultimately Mr. Blair. If he really broke international law then I would hope that he should be found guilty and accept the verdict. With time for reflection perhaps he could be reformed.

Rhys Bridges, Mora, Portugal

I am each saddened by the deaths I hear about in Irag and related areas. But I also believe that a culture which treats half of its population as little more than slaves, which considers those who deviate from fundamental religion as expendable, which conceives that freedom of thought is virtually non-existent must be dismantled. From what I saw of purple thumbs on women and men, a new idea of freedom is taking hold. The dramatic increase in information now given to American forces by local Iraqi shows an increased desire to leave the crushing oppression of the past. Consequently I praise Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush for doing what most of the rest of the world was willing to ignore.

William Prueter, Chesterland, Ohio, USA

If any leader of under developed nation will say such then you people label him as terrorist or threat for world peace. Now this war has badly effected the life of comman man of Pakistan,iraq and Afghanistan.Those effected are not few but in millions.Does west no consider him a war criminal?

nazia, Lahore, Pakistan

Even as a Labour supporter and one time Labour Party member, I had very little respect for Mr Blair - he was in the wrong damn party for one. I had no idea he was a war hawk in addition to his conservative agenda. What little respect I did have, in my belief that he would try to prevent war in Iraq, dissuade Pres. Bush from the military course, has totally evaporated.
Thank goodness he's out of office; thank goodness Mr Brown is now in office, and thank goodness Mr Brown has stripped the Prime Ministerial office of the ability to declare war and handed that responsibility firmly back to Parliament.
A others have said, both Mr Blair and Mr Bush should be tried as war criminals.

Phil Deamer, Lawrence, Kansas, USA

Bored of hearing about war crimes........

First year law student could get Bush & Blair off in five minutes.

Gulf war 1 (UN approved)ended with conditional ceasefire.

Saddam did not comply with the conditions.

Case closed!

John.B, Derbyshire,

The bombing threats into UK is only partly because of the War in Iraq! Al-Qaeda and its cells in Uk existed well before, were seeking for new adepts well before, and were planning bombings long before as well. The threats that Uk is facing is mainly because of its absurd immigration policy and its weaknesses in managing a multicultural society. The soft and politically correct Uk's approach is not paying.. and then because of the fundamentalist's ideology that regard Britain as an historical close partner of America, a former colonial Empire and so on..

Stefano, Italy,

If he thought it was such a good idea why didn't he see it through?
People are getting slaughtered daily thanks to him and he swans around playing tennis and trying to be a peace envoy.
Arrest him and despatch him to The Hague immediately.

alan madox, wirral, england

When does he face trial?

Jack, London, UK

when starting their cliche was " freedom of Iraq and welfare for Iraqi people".
what they got at the end " the well preserved oil wells by the kurdish guardians for them in the north and the mess and poverty in the other parts of the country which is apt to ethnic war too.
who's in this favour ?
freedom of UK and welfare for US economy.

Ediz, Istanbul, Turkiye

Every innocent Iraqi (who had no way of influencing Saddam) killed during and since the invasion has as much right to life as Blair.

Brian Christley, Abergele, UK

Those who can't see that a) Saddam was only being contained by sanctions that were killing Iraqi children, while b) he was keeping as much WMD capacity as possible (as Dr David Kelly well knew) while c) refusing to cooperate unconditionally with UN inspectors as required in SCR 1441 - requiring his removal in the interests of Iraq, the Middle East, the West and the UN - are the deluded ones.

Add in that Al-Qaeda specifically used the Iraqi sanctions and the containment-related presence of US troops in Saudi for recruiting fighters prior to 9/11 and the case for invasion becomes in practical terms unanswerable.

The presence of coalition troops in Iraq is, incidentally, sanctioned by the UN Security Council in resolutions 1486, 1500, 1511, 1546 and 1723, for those who are still so ignorant as to believe that the war is illegal.

It is clear that the whole thing was done unimaginably incompetently though, for which the guilty should pay.

Chazza2, Bristol,

davenp35 of San Diego asserts that "It was the right thing to do. It's sad that it will probably take many years for many Americans and citizens of the UK to agree...just like WWII" As a British subject born in WWII, for whom air raid shelters were a fact of life like any other, I totally reject the cowboy approach to international law in this statement. Dictatorship is dictatorship, whether the culprit is the President of the United States, or the "Leader" of Nazi Germany. George Bush Jnr tore up the UN Charter to invade Iraq, and in doing so gave a two-fingered salute to his own father, who had fulfilled the UN mandate to evict Saddam from Kuwait, but went no further. Nothing can alter the fact that the subsequent invasion of Iraq by Bush Jnr, without a UN mandate, was an act of dictatorship. The word "dictator", from the Latin, means a ruler who goes by what he himself declares to be right. The cap fits, and George Bush Jnr will have no choice but to wear it in world history books.

Edmund Burke, Kingston upon Thames, England

Truly a disgusting admission on Blair's part. He should spend the rest of his days emptying the bedpans of paralyzed veterans of his lovely little "I believe in this" war.

Jim Houghton, Los Angeles, USA

I can only hope and pray that there will be someone in GB who has the courage to bring this man to the tribunal in the Hague for what he has done. And never forget all the people who had to die for this.

DJ, Berlin,

It was all about weopons of mass destruction wasn't it.?

Did DA ask 'Tony ' about invading Iran as well, afer all they seem to be producing one so presumably it would therefore also be the 'right thing to do.

For an expensively educated lawyer/politician to be using such language in a reasoning sense is truly appalling.

Furthermore Instead of apologising for being partly responsible for the disaster that has befallen millions of Iraqis, he begins his new life as a Catholic by purposely giving an interview in order to defend what to the majority is the indefensible. Truly tragic.

t jones, Paris, France

The ancient Athenians, during their brief experiment with democracy, had some customs that we might well consider adopting. For instance, magistates and other officials were appointed for fixed periods by vote of the entire electorate - and, at the end of their time in office, the same electorate voted on their performance and chose a suitable reward or punishment. A leader who had performed disastrously might even be sentenced to death. If we reintroduced that custom, it would do much to concentrate the minds of those running for office and help them stay on the straight and narrow while in power.

Tom Welsh, Basingstoke,

It does NOT come as a surprise that Blair was for it all along!
Behind that childish face and innocent smile lurks a convinced imperialist of the worst kind!
However if any thing Blair showed the world , once again, that the UK is a frustrated imperialist power waiting for the big bully to do what it wished it could do on its own but can NOT!

Omar I. Nashashibi, Amman, Jordan

In my book, Blair appears to be personally responsible for every death and injury in our under-equipped and under-funded armed force.

Leave alone volunteering a war in the first place, doing so on what amounts to a peacetime budget is criminally irresponsible.

The man should go before a court, be stripped of any office, and every penny of his assets seized to help pay hospital treatment for those unlucky enough to suffer as a direct result of his hubris.

David Jefferis, Brill, UK

Who can say whether this war was a good or a bad idea? You don't know what would have happened if we HADN'T gone in!

Stop wasting energy second guessing things. Deal with the situation we have today and work to make the best of it. Wallowing around in the rear view mirror is useless.

Illegal war? According to who? Last time I checked, the U.S. and Britain were sovereign nations. We don't need to ask permission of the cartoon cast of characters at the U.N. for anything, especially when it pertains to our national security. In fact, any national leader who would defer to an 'international body' on national security issues should be fired immediately.

Get some kahones, people.

Marcus, Miami, FL

In a fair world former Prime Minister Tony Blair would be doing jail time.

Pleroma, Helsinki, Finland

How many innocents have died horribly to "make right" the delusions and vanities of politicians.
Next time these politicians get a bright idea, let's test the strength of their belief by giving them a rifle and placing them right in the front line of battle. That would certainly save many thousands of lives, one way or another.

Max , London,

Thank goodness for Tony Blair. May Britain continue to have such leaders of moral integrity and purpose.

James Letten, aberystwyth, wales

Remarkable. A British leader who leads. And does the difficult thing because it was the right thing. History will vindicate him, and history will derived the pathetic poll-driven Chamberlains who current lead once-great England.

Lor, Toronto,

In my childhood, I admire this kind of person who has the courage not to give up what he believes, but now, Blair broke my relief.
Yeah, he is a quite excellent person, but maybe not a eligible PM.

Daisy, Jinan, China

First, a national book burning ceremony of his 'money-grabbing' autobiography in Trafalgar Square, compensation to all victims of his holocaust through the royalties from his books/lectures and a swift public trial in the Hague. Then, maybe then we can put our embarrasment, our disgust and our shame to rest.

Alex, Glasgow, UK

Blair is quite mad and should seek proffessional help! I hear that now he wants to be "President" of the EU?

Alan , St. Catharines, Canada

The arrogance that seems to come with time for the holder of any position of power is very worrying. The blinkered "I am right" approach together with a selective deafness is responsible for minor and major catastrophies the world over. The only difference is one of scale and you can't get much bigger than starting a war for reasons that you can't even justify to your closest allies.

Eric, Ilkley, West Yorkshire

Blairs political leadership has now lead to bombing and bomb threats into our country.
The taxpayers have to foot an enormous security bill.
He said there was an imidiate threat from WMD in 45 minutes. There were no such threat and now he says he was right!! Please let him explain this to the war tribunal in the Hague.

Peter Darlington, Southampton,

Blair still believes he was right to go to war for regime change. This is surely actionable by the International Criminal court at the Hague, as the U.K is signed up to the convention.
This admission must put him out of the running to be the first president of Europe.
Tim Black

T M J Black, Southamption, U. K.

Another example of how the PM does whatever he pleases. The Cabinet is a rather pointless and expensive lame duck.

Mrp, geneva, switzerland

To be fair Tony Blair and George Bush did a great thing riding Iraq of Saddam and freeing Iraq.

Lets hope peace will come to Iraq soon, and Iraq's can enjoy there freedom and democracy.

mohsen, malaga, spain

So Bliar ignored advice to the contrary and took this country to war because 'he thought he was doing the right thing.' So much for democracy and cabinet rule.

The terrorists who brought the twin towers down also thought they were doing the right thing.

EU Leaders be warned .... this egotistical, self-obsessed and power-hungry man wants to be the first EU President. If he is 'elected' you can't say you weren't warned.

There is a reason why the people of Britain despise him!

Donna Walker, Effingham, Surrey

since the war IS & WAS an illegal war,
how can it have been the right thing to do Mr B'liar?
when he faces the International Court will he still be saying it was the right thing do?
good luck mr deluded.

suzyn, clacton on sea, essex UK

Can't Blair be sent to the Hague for trial?

Keith, Winnipeg, Canada

Must one have more guff about Blair's 'beliefs'? He must think he's the Second Coming the way he rabbits on about them. Who cares? He's yesterday - except for the mess around us now, which doesn't need any more enumeration.
The media could do a real service to us all by forgetting him. Isn't 'I believe in what I am doing' the great excuse of our time?

john problem, london,

Tony Blair, are you becoming a Catholic in order that you could confess to your sins? No God will redeem you for your evil war which has killed thousands and maimed a few more thousands and a couple of millions have become refugugees

Bala Superamaniam, Sydney, Australia

Just because you believe something is right doesn't make it so and Blair was delusional in thinking it. Bush manufactured the Iraq war with Blairs help and neither of them are much different to Hitler and the Japanese generals prior to WWII. The fall out from their ideologies are horrific for the civilians in Iraq, the troops from the US & UK that are being killed and abandoned by their leaders and the safety of the citizens in both countries. There is not one element in this chapter of the wests warmongering that is positive and whatever Bush says, it is Vietnam pt 2. From Roman times right up till now, history is littered with leaders who believed they were doing the right thing and were subsequently found to be genocidal maniacs, mentally unstable or racked with disease. The only remaining question is whether International criminal charges should be brought against these two at least to make a moral point even if it cant be pursued in practice.

Mike, Alicante, Spain

Fewer and fewer of us have the taste for watching a fight, let alone participating. When the fight lands at your feet you have many choices. Would you consider fighting for your friends, family and yourself. You haven't got much time to make your decision because they already have made theirs.

The diligence of few has been growing into fruition, it's not done, far from it. Don't illude yourself, if we want to prevail We shall Fight.

Steven, Victorville, CA

Hi,
The anatomy of war is complicated but the law of war is defined. The war (Iraq) was against international law what ever the grounds. If do not have respect for the law then you are lawless.

Terence Hale, zandvoort, Holland

Actually, this is very serious - Blair obviously overstepped his authority. He was not a dictator or a president, merely a senior minister - the prime one, and did not have individual power to commit the British army to the slaughter it faced in Iraq.

Blair's role should obviously have been to accept the advice of his advisors and not go to war.

This makes him totally and inexorably culpable for every death and injury of every British soldier in the Iraq scenario.

janda, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

If Saddam had played ball with the UN, Blair and Bush would not have acted.

1) Madmen like Saddam don't do peace people, ask the Kurds and Kuwaitis.

2) Don't confuse the mess today, caused by gross mishandling of the aftermath of the invasion. YES, Bush and Blair do have to answer for that! (or should that be Halliburton and Cheney?)

Mark, Antrim, Ireland

Only geniuses and idiots are intellectually autonomous and never change their minds - and Tony Blair is is certainly not a genius.

Claudio, Ascoli Piceno, Italy

Delusional then, delusional now.

Stephen, London,

Miloshovic belived he was right, Pol Pot belived they were right. Hitler believed he was right. Nuremburg, the Hague, Arusha & Phon pen, were set up to test the rights and wrongs and judge those involved.. It is time that those responsible for the virtual destruction of a viable country, the creation of 4 million refugees, Thousands of Deaths, and countless maiming and mutilations, are held to account for Their beliefs and decisions. To try to justify based on your own mistrust and paranoia of others, was not acceptable at the places above, and is certainly not in todays world.

sandy, Victoria,

One word...NUMPTY!

TJ, Greenock, Scotland

What is the position, under international law, of the leader of a government which, in the absence of a UN mandate, invades another sovereign country which has not attacked it, does not threaten to attack it, and has no plans to attack it?

Henry, London,

I'll second and third what many of my fellow citizens have said: "Thank goodness for Mr. Blair." I'll add a qualifier, though: "Thank goodness he's gone, and may his duplicity in an illegal war of aggression, and the war crimes committed against hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis trouble his sleep at night."

Todd Ojala, Chicago, IL

Two peas in a pod - they do everything from vanity, so they can feel good even about the horrible mistakes they made in starting these elective wars. And because they're addicted to preening in front of the mirror and don't care about other people except as "the desired admiring audience", they crave another fix now - destroy Iran too and pretend they're doing that country too a favour.

They're so transparent - and so is/was the ulterior motive which taints their self-serving narrative/performance: Oil.

Julia Iskandar, London, England

Thank you, Mr. Blair, and thank you to the British people. To get an understanding of the value of all that has been done, one would need to ask an Iraqi. Give them a year or two more to get things cleaned up a bit and then ask them if they think the war was worth it.

George, San Jose, California, USA

Thank goodness for Tony Blair. May Britain continue to have such leaders of moral integrity and purpose.

Samuel Young, Paris, France

A True Friend indeed.
Thanks, to the Mother Country.

Jerry Katz, Bay Shore, NY, USA

I did it and I'm glad. I stepped it and I think it smells wonderful.

That's what he is saying. He has learned nothing, and he thinks this makes him adorable, like Bush.

Christopher Hobe Morrison, Pine Bush, Ulster County, NY, USA

It just proves how deluded some people can be.

judy, Liverpool, england

The vile individual believes somehow that by being 'honest' he will be expiated of guilt. I can only hope, one day, he faces a war crimes court. I fear however he will live out his days, get paid by sick MNCs to be a rubberstamping board member and making speeches and ghostwriting books. The only real hope is that in the process he falls out with his cronies, Campbell, Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld etc.

Also given that David Aaronovitch can still not admit that he is wrong to support the war, holds out little hope for this interview. I, for one, wont be watching because the very sight of Blair makes me ill.

KGersen, London,

Thank goodness for Tony Blair. May Britain continue to have such leaders of moral integrity and purpose.

Rosie Smyth, Canterbury,

It was the right thing to do. It's sad that it will probably take many years for many Americans and citizens of the UK to agree...just like WWII.

davenp35, San Diego, CA