Mr Blair’s resolve to confront Saddam was borne of his understanding that, in a world still struggling to come to terms with the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, a tyrant like Saddam could not be allowed to maintain his constant acts of provocation against the West and its allies, or indeed his brutal repression of the people of Iraq. When the US president, on the eve of the invasion, offered him the chance to withdraw from the coalition, the British prime minister replied: “I’m staying, even if it costs me my government.” I remember George W Bush saying, when I interviewed him at the White House after the invasion, that Mr Blair told him he was prepared to lose power rather than back down on his commitment to tackling Saddam.
Rescind tony knighthood gets hundreds thousands full#
Having abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban last summer, does anyone seriously believe that Joe Biden and Boris Johnson have the mettle to stand up to modern-day tyrants like the Russian President Vladimir Putin or the ayatollahs in Tehran?īy deciding to ally himself with the Bush administration’s campaign to remove Saddam, Mr Blair knew full well that he was putting his political reputation on the line, not least because of the fierce resistance he encountered from his own backbenches. The misrepresentation of intelligence relating to Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, and the lamentable lack of post-conflict planning, are two of the more obvious areas where Mr Blair, together with acolytes like Alastair Campbell, hardly covered themselves in glory.īut on the fundamental issue of whether to commit Britain to supporting the US-led campaign to overthrow Saddam’s brutal dictatorship, Mr Blair displayed moral courage of a very high order, a quality one suspects today’s generation of conflict-averse politicians would struggle to emulate. Mr Blair’s handling of the Iraq brief was by no means faultless, as the numerous inquiries into the Iraq affair have demonstrated. But they should not include his decision to support the overthrow of the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003. The Iraq War hero said if Sir Tony "has any decency," then he would turn the award down.There are many sound reasons why people might question the award of a knighthood to Tony Blair, from his botched reform of the House of Lords to the curse of devolution. Read more: Lieutenant Colonel Tim Collins' Eve-of-Battle Speech "I'm astonished at the hypocrisy that he doesn't turn it down, because it was a gift from the Queen," the former officer told Nick Ferrari. "I think we have to remember the knighthood he's been given is the Queen's personal gift, it's not from the government."Ĭol Collins said he felt during his time in office, Mr Blair had attempted to "supplant the Queen," recalling during the Millennium celebrations he "stepped in front of the Queen, they want to push the monarchy to one side." Read more: Blair’s defence sec Geoff Hoon 'was told to burn Iraq memo' as knighthood row continues Speaking to LBC's Nick Ferrari the former army officer said he was not surprised Mr Blair had been honoured, adding it had been a "long time coming." More than six hundred thousand people have signed a petition calling for Sir Tony's appointment by the Queen to the Order of the Garter - the oldest and most senior British Order of Chivalry - to be rescinded over his domestic record and the Iraq War. The comments come amid national discussion over the former Prime Minister's knighthood. The 61-year-old retired British Army Colonel, originally from east Belfast, is best known for his role in the 2003 Iraq War and his inspirational eve-of-battle speech. By EJ Tim Collins has hit out at former Prime Minister Tony Blair and his "hypocrisy" in accepting a knighthood from the Queen.