Anyone who continues to describe the Euston Manifesto as 'pro-war' is just a lying wanker. Norman Geras rebuts this one yet again. How many more times, I wonder....?
As one of the founding signatories of the Manifesto, I think that my blog demonstrates that I was not a supporter of the invasion.
Not sure I still agree with every word I've ever written here, but I was broadly opposed to the invasion of Iraq and sceptical about the likelihood of success. I still have my doubts. And I (perhaps mistakenly) thought that the idiotic response of large sections of the left were no real cause for concern either.
The one thing I did comment on a lot was why so many people regarded themselves as experts on the subject - and was that expertise borne out any real understanding of the facts or out of a need to make a different point altogether.
Re-reading these, it reminds me of Eric's post a while ago about how blogging can change your mind. Mine has changed on a few things in the last year or so.
But, if I had to sum up why I signed the Euston Manifesto in a few words, I'd urge people to read John Lloyds book and reflect on lousy way that things are discussed - and not just by journalists.
One thing I've learned about the ongoing situation in Iraq: That it's a complex issue, and large sections of the left shown themselves to be fossilised by their response to it.
If you think this is the case, then I'd urge you to sign it as well.