Well that's your opinion but you can't allow countries to harbour international terrorists, and you can't turn a blind eye to murderous regimes, indiscriminately gassing citizens either. I don't deny that we didn't plan how those countries would improve beyond the wars, or that the government sexed up the public story about WMD. However there was still justification for force against Sadam who was not complying with weapons inspectors, had previously launching missiles at Israel to try and create a wider conflict and concerns were justified of him doing this again, circumventing international laws, defying the UN, killing opposition to his leadership, torturing citizens who did not fully comply with his regime, and ethnically cleansing elements of society. The idea that Blair is a war criminal is a great story for the Tory media to push, but lets not forget that almost every Tory voted to go to war, and those same ones turned around and accused Blair afterwards. There was some media spin to sell the war, but I don't buy that he is a war criminal, naive in believing american intelligence, naive in believing we could make it a better country, naive to think the yanks weren't going to use it as an opportunity to gain access and influence over oil production. But not a ware criminal for me. If Blair is a war criminal for sending us in ill prepared, with some PR spin around the reason for war, then every wartime leader we have ever had would also be a war criminal and some, say Churchill were actually real war criminals specifically targeting civilians.