Chilcott enquiry

Gononsuch.
I expect the young men who join the forces do so in order to protect their own country.
WMDs were the supposed threat,which have never been proven.
When soldiers are sent to fight,they should be sufficiently equipt to do so.I remember reading of families who were sending boots out to their sons .
Blair was power happy.

Swimhome I still have doubts about the death of David Kelly. A lot of questions were never answered.

Do all young men join up for patriotic reasons?

DH joined up at 17 to escape from his abusive mother. He had no patriotic intentions at all. When he was sent to fight in Kuwait his choices were be called back up or go to prison. Bit of a Hobson's choice really.

When I was leaving school (during the troubles) several of my friends joined up...again not for any patriotic ideals but to escape abuse and poverty.

Then more recently lads who I had taught in Primary joined up. Again to escape poverty/abuse. I don't think they even consider patriotism or potential death.

I'm sure some have different reasons for joining up but I can only talk from my own experiences.

Gononsuch

You are sadly misinformed ('You do know that our forces are made up of volunteers that are people that actaully (sic) want to fight')

I served many years in the RAF and subsequently married a soldier. I can assure you that the majority of service personnel do NOT, as you put it, 'want to fight.' but will do so if they have to. Check out your facts before posting something you clearly know nothing about - it's offensive.

*Vampirequeen

Agree with your post. Many different reasons for joining the forces. Don't think 'wanting to fight' is top of the list.

In deprived areas it can present as an opportunity to get away and earn a regular wage.

Tony Blair isn't a war criminal by @JanvierUK, a first generation UK-born person of Sierra Leone immigrants. She describes what a war criminal is really like.

Thanks for that link thatbags if it wasn't already, it should be clear to anyone reading that that Tony Blair is not a war criminal.

As Janvier says, words mean things and I think it's all to easy to forget just how damaging they can be and how much pain they can cause.

Although TB isn't a war criminal in the sense of what happened in Sierra Leone, he is still one.

Like all crimes there are different levels. The Sierra Leone war criminals were amongst the worst type but TB deliberately misled the House and the public in order to take us into an illegal war. He knew it was an illegal war but still carried on. He sent many of our troops to their deaths or physical/mental injuries that have blighted their lives. Please don't remind me of the para Olympians etc. I accept these brave people have rebuilt their lives but it's still not the life they would have had. Then we have to consider how many Iraqis have died, been injured and/or lost everything. The rise of ISIS can be laid at his and Bush's door too. So the world is now a more dangerous place for everyone.

To anyone who doesn't think that soldiers are damaged. DH looks and acts like a 'normal' person. You would never know what he's been through or seen. However last night he had one of his regular nightmares when he was fighting for his life and unfortunately I got in the way. I was awakened as he jabbed his fingers into my left eye. My scream woke him up. This morning my eye is very sore but fortunately my eye was closed at the time.

No he isn't, as Janvier said, saying that he is "inadvertently belittling the suffering" of those who've suffered at the hands of war criminals.

I don't see how it's belittling the suffering. I made it clear that I don't think he's in the same category as the Sierra Leone war criminals but on the other hand he's not an innocent.

He sent our troops into an illegal war. Anything that is illegal is a crime. He was in charge therefore he committed an illegal act. He is a war criminal.

If I have a migraine I will say I'm in agony. Am I then belittling the agony of those who are dying of cancer or some other painful condition?

I'm not sure your migraine is the best analogy. I would certainly not compare a long, painful and life ending death from cancer, motor nurone or MS for example with a painful but time limited and not life threatening migraine. chilcott is highly critical of Blair, rightly so. I deplore the actions he took and question his motivation as well as believing he made the wrong decision. I don't believe he foresaw or intended the consequences. That doesn't excuse his poor judgement or diminish itscdepreadful long lasting consequences but I don't believe it puts him in the same category as eg the former nazis tried and convictecat Nuremberg

Sorry I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't likening the illnesses but rather showing that the word 'agony' can be used to describe different levels of pain. My migraine agony isn't anything like a cancer sufferers agony but we could still use the same word.

The same goes for 'war criminal'. TB knowingly declared an illegal war. Therefore he is a war criminal. Not to the extent that the Nazis were or those in Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Yugoslavia etc. but still a war criminal.

Sorry should have said 'not in the same way' rather than 'to the extent'