Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

cynic - Wont stop them they are hell bent on Independence, Salmond v Sturgeon will she be able to shake him off wouldn't bet against her. The Greens gaining popularity in Scotland will not help Labour either, Millibandus if he had a gun would love to shoot that Abbot woman for agreeing that Trident must not be funded. LOL you couldn't make it up.

They dont query the figures hays because they know they are heading for government and to change them would look like disaster overnight.

Use your loaf for a change.

Bollocks!

chris - despite the bluster, the chill blast from the collapsing oil prices will have sobered up many ..... i concur that more autonomy will be demanded in the next parliament, but with what trade-off

cynic - There lies the question :0)

All will be revealed on the Andrew Marr show on Sunday when one of the guests is Nicola Sturgeon. Gawd help Andrew Marr - Sturgeon was interviewed on Channel 4 news last night and the interviewer couldn't get a word in edgeways.:-)

if you're lucky, any revelation will be from what she doesn't say

All the MPs are unhappy that Chilcot is delayed. However, it is not up to the government when it is published. There has to be a period of reply to allegations and comments, which is where we are now. It is Chilcot himself who is holding up the process. If Labour had not tried to delay the start for several years, we would be reading it now.

Is Cruella deliberately holding up the paedophile inquiry?

If so, for what reasons?

Who has the dossier now?

If so which pages are being redacted?

Come on Haze, you say you have friends in high places, you should know.

I think the Chilcot report is a complete waste of time, firstly its already been censored as to the detail of information that's going to be publicised anyway. Second is the cost of this report, money well spent I think not. And finally your never going to get a report that states war was the wrong action, the report will just justify why we entered into war with a watered down version of the known facts at the time.

Shortie,

Not so sure.

I think there will be a justified condemnation of "justification" of the Iraqi war.

I think some will be placed on the "Security Forces" for their "opinions" and find Blair's decision making "questionable".

Also, may condemn the post conflict planning by UK and USA which appears minimal and atrocious.

I was against the war, but think Blair like the present government has to much belief in his own ability and judgements (MAD or Deluded).

===============

I would like to see the Falklands war and Belgrano sinking re-examined.

I wonder what the bill has been for the continuing defence of that rocky base has been over the last 35 years

====

Perhaps, it may prevent wars decided by the Whim of the Governing "bodies"!

I will have to watch it, there are 5 "I" in that post.

The report is surely going to heavily criticise the 'intelligence' which Blair used to 'con' everyone into believing that Saddam Hussein had 'weapons of mass destruction' and was also 'imminently about to launch an attack on the west' and so needed 'taking out' asap.

'IYSWIM'

Shortie, agreed. These reports generally take far too long to become public and are a waste of money. However if one of my loved ones had been killed as a result of the war, I would be hoping for some explanations and some closure.

During the last gulf war I was a PCO working for Alenia Marconi, the amount of order book for PMG's as well as Radar systems went sky-high... In some respect wars create jobs and stimulate the economy, bet you can't stick that in the Chilcot report...

Also lets face facts, for a while Saddam was an ally of the UK and USA, where do you think he got his weapons systems from? The Chilcot report won't even scratch the surface to look into the real reasons for war going back decades or why Saddam went from being a friend to a foe...

Page 3 is back in the Sun. It looks like it was a publicity stunt to drop it for a few days.

As we now look back to see the validity of the intelligence and realise we must have been conned rotten, well, it's this, IMHO, which causes us to imagine how there must have been some kind of Blair/Bush Jnr conspiracy.

In other words, it was all Bush Jnr's idea to finish off Saddam for his old man's sake and, to make it look credible, pulled in Blair and the British forces for credibility.

Proving stuff like that must be damn near impossible.

And so the Chilcot Inquiry is a complete waste of time and money. But I guess it has to be done.

The aftermath of the Iraq war has made the British people totally lose its appetite for war altogether. We cannot now believe the evidence for it from any of our politicians.

I think this situation will stay with us for years or maybe even decades and I also wonder if this is what Putin and his advisers have concluded about us too. Thank goodness the oil producers seem to have quitened him down by slashing the price of oil by 50%. The Russian Ruble has crashed and Russia has been quietened down in the Ukraine with 'economic measures'.

Mind you, we haven't heard much about what is happening out there of late - so is that inference correct?

Anyhow, IMHO, the Chilcot Inquiry is a complete waste of time and money.

If the Chilcot report confirms that our troops were sent to war without adequate combat gear who carries the can for that part of the debacle?

Phew! It was a close call for us, guys, with Page 3, eh?

PS. Did I say the Chilcot Inquiry was a waste of time and money?

Miliband blocked Iraq war inquiry again and again, says Cameron... and Labour leader dismisses the delay in two sentences

Labour MPs prevented report being published 'years ago', claims PM

Party's leader Ed Miliband personally voted against inquiry four times 

Issue erupts after it's revealed Chilcot will not report until after election

Former top Labour figures will come under scrutiny when it's published

Ed Miliband delayed the start of the Iraq war inquiry by voting ‘again and again and again’ against it being set up, David Cameron said yesterday.

The Prime Minister said the report’s conclusions would have been published ‘years ago’ had it not been for Labour MPs blocking the plans.

Mr Miliband personally voted against an inquiry on four occasions. The issue erupted in the House of Commons after it emerged that Sir John Chilcot will not report until after the election.

Despite the row dominating news bulletins all day, Mr Miliband skated over the issue at Prime Minister’s Questions – dismissing it in two sentences.

The Labour leader did not even ask Mr Cameron about the issue, saying only that he agreed the report should be ‘published as soon as possible’.

Labour MPs opposed a series of proposals for an inquiry in the Commons until one was ordered by Gordon Brown.

Mr Miliband personally voted against starting an inquiry on four occasions as an MP, first in October 2006, then in June 2007, once more in March 2008 and again in March 2009.

Several former senior Labour figures, including Mr Miliband’s brother David, will come under scrutiny when the report is finally published.

At the start of Prime Minister’s Questions, Mr Miliband said: ‘Let me start by saying, on the Iraq inquiry, that it was set up six years ago and I agree with the Prime Minister that it should be published as soon as possible.’


He then moved swiftly on to the economy. The PM countered, saying the report would have been published ‘years ago’ had Labour MPs voted in favour of setting up the inquiry earlier.

‘So perhaps he could start by recognising his own regret at voting against the establishment of the inquiry,’ he said.

Perhaps he could start by recognising his own regret at voting against the establishment of the inquiry
Prime Minister David Cameron 
Mr Miliband replied: ‘The inquiry was established six years ago, after our combat operations had ended, and frankly, my views on the Iraq war are well known and I want this inquiry to be published.’

Unlike his brother, Ed Miliband was not an MP in 2003 in the run-up to the war. At the time he was at Harvard University in the US.

During his campaign for the Labour leadership he said the invasion was a ‘profound mistake’ and claimed to have opposed it in private.

But according to reports, his brother dismissed this claim, saying that the only candidate for the leadership who could say they were against the war at the time was Diane Abbott.