Tony Blair has apologized at the Labour Party conference for having acted on "intelligence that proved to be wrong" in the Iraq War, but not for "removing Saddam Hussain".
But the decision to launch a war against Iraq was not based on intelligence. The decision to launch the war against Iraq was taken by George Bush and Tony Blair before the intelligence to justify the war was requested, considered and produced to the public. The intelligence about the Iraq weapons of mass destruction was requested in order to justify the war. And as the consideration of the intelligence did not reveal sufficient justification for a war, this intelligence was massaged and presented to the public in such way that a war would appear to be justifiable. This was an obvious and deliberate deception of the public.
So, Tony Blair's apology should have been clear that Tony Blair apologizes for "deliberately using the intelligence to mislead the public about the urgent need for a war against Iraq" - not for launching a war "in good faith" on the basis of intelligence that he mistakenly believed to be right, but in the end proved to be wrong. Presenting his apology in such way is just another act of deceiving the public. Just as he did with the misuse of the intelligence to justify the war against Iraq.
Tony Blair did not apologize for "removing Saddam Hussain". But this is not what Tony Blair is blamed for. The removal of Saddam Hussain was not the only result of the Iraq War. Tens of British people were killed in the war, and so were over a thousand of Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. And the tortures of hundreds (or was it thousands?) of Iraqis at the hands of the Coalition Forces exceeded in their brutality and perversity the tortures of Saddam Hussain.
And all this was the result of the War which Tony Blair first tried to justify by misuse of intelligence, and when this failed, by the "need to remove Saddam Hussain". And it is for these unnecessary and unjustifiable deaths and atrocities caused by Tony Blair's war that the British public expected him to apologize. But he did not even mention these deaths and atrocities. As, if the only thing that happened in the Iraq war was the "removal of Saddam Hussain".
Not many people blamed Tony Blair for "removing John Major". But had the "removal of John major" been accompanied by bombings of "the Tory strongholds", and tens of thousands of British people being killed for just happening to be in Britain, would not at least some people in Britain had objected to such "regime change"?
Starting a war without a valid reason is not a matter for "apology". It is a war crime. And, if we (Mankind) had a just and honest world order, Tony Blair would have been put on trial as a war criminal. But under the present world order only "leaders" of smaller countries, like Serbia or Iraq, can be tried for war crimes. And, even then, only when it is "convenient" to the "greater nations". Leaders of the greater nations can get away with any crimes. They are judged, as Tony Blair says, only by History.
But what would have happened, if Tony Blair were tried for his war crimes?
He would have either spent the rest of his life in a secure and comfortable prison, or, at most, would have been executed and departed from this world.
Would such punishments be enough for all the deaths and destruction that he has caused (jointly with his Coalition Partners)?
Of course, not!
Such punishments would have been too small a price to pay for Tony Blair's crimes.
So, what is the worst punishment that can be inflicted on Tony Blair for his war crimes?
Electing Tony Blair Prime Minister for another five years.
Tony Blair has created a real mess in Iraq. And, if he is elected for another term, it will be him who will be faced with dealing with this mess. And it will be for us (Mankind) to keep rubbing his nose into the mess he has created.
There is no better punishment for people like Tony Blair, than leaving them to deal with the results of their own actions. Why should anybody else clear up Tony's mess?
But punishing Tony Blair for his lawless, dishonest, and unjustified war is just one of the reasons why Tony Blair should be elected for another term.
The other reason for electing Tony Blair Prime Minister for another term is that there are no other candidates for the job to chose from. Both the Conservatives and the Liberals still have a long way to go before they can produce a candidate that would be better or even just equal to Tony Blair.
In spite of his tendency to "pull a fast one" (as he has tried to do by his "apology"), Tony Blair still remains the Best Tory, the Best Liberal and, certainly, the Best Labour Prime Minister that "party politics" can offer us today.
So, love Tony, or hate Tony, Tony is still the only dish on the menu.
And, if Tony becomes more mature and secure and gets rid of his tendency to "pull a fast one", he even has the potential of becoming a truly great leader, and of remaining Prime Minister not just for the next term, but for the next two, three, or four terms, or even longer ... until he retires due to old age.