Isn't it funny that the prosecution of Katharine Gun (if you dont know who she is and what she did Brucie, then find out before you reply....) was dropped when the defence announced that the illegality of the war would be part of the defence. This would have forced the government to publish in full the advice given by the attourney general about the legality of war (which up until now has been kept secret). There are strong suspicions with some evidence that he changed his advice in the run up to war under pressure from Tony Blair - because Admiral Sir Michael Boyce demanded such assurances before he would lead the country into war.

Bruce I admit that know nothing of the cener for constitutional affairs, however I didn't know what court might have jurisdiction over illegal wars and that was the only quote I could find referring to it. Are you aware of any court that would have jurisdiction? The nearest would be the International Criminal Court, but that could only be concerned with the conduct during the war, not the fighting of the war itself, and it would only have jurisdiction over the UK, not the US as they refused to sign up to it (and bullied other countries into agreeing not to hand over their soldiers to it if I remember correctly). Obviously the US was a bit more realistic about their future conduct than the UK was when it signed up to the treaty...

There will always be differences of opinion in law, but when the vast majority of international lawyers believe it to be illegal, and very few legal, and one of the ones who said it was legal was the one was asked to give advice to the government and probably changed his advice under pressure.... Starts to look a little fishy...


An article that discusses the attorney generals position