Norm Geras is rounding up reaction to Blair's testimony. He observes:

Opponents of the war complain that the questioning of Tony Blair by the Chilcot panel wasn't very testing. They're right. I could have posed him tougher questions and I'm no lawyer. For example, Blair went back on what he'd said to Fern Britton in December - that he still would have wanted Britain to support a US invasion had he known there were no WMD in Iraq. Others treated this statement as damning of Blair, when it isn't. But the Chilcot panel might have probed, and put him to the trouble of explaining why he'd said it and had now decided to go back on that. But they failed to.

Read the whole thing. Larison is withering:

Going before a toothless inquiry to hold forth and give self-justifying statements is no better and offers no more accountability to the public than issuing defiant statements from the podium at AEI or on the op-ed pages of The Wall Street Journal. Like George Bush, Tony Blair will presumably never hold political office again in his life, but that was already a given. Meanwhile, the damage has been done, and not one of the responsible parties will pay any price for his wrongdoing.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.