Iraq: No debate is necessary

"Five years after the invasion of Iraq, we, as neutral observers, are going to discuss its legacy in terms of success or failure. Can you believe that? Now the worst foreign policy mistake of post-1945 Western democracy is up for deliberation, it is fair to say that anything goes.
When Jerry Sadowitz posed the question on national television “Jews and Nazis, so who's right?” I thought he was joking. Not any more. In this climate so many events that were previously off limits can be reopened.
Lee Harvey Oswald: dangerous assassin or just keeping the powerful on their toes? Nelson Mandela: shouldn't life mean life?
You want a debate, though, we'll have a debate. Is the region safer? No. Is the world safer? No. Is the West safer? No. Are the Iraqi people safer? No. Did we find any weapons? No. Did we find Osama bin Laden? No. Will it be over soon? No. Is it a recruitment poster for al-Qaeda? Yes. Did we at least get some cheap petrol out of it? No. Read my lips. Worst. Decision. Ever.

There is very little to add to Martin Samuel's brilliant article in The Times. On the rights and wrongs of the Iraq war, no debate is necessary. The only thing we ought to be talking about as we mark the fifth anniversary of the brutal, deceitful and illegal attack on a sovereign state, is how we can bring those who planned it before a war crimes tribunal.