"So was it worth it? There is no unanimity here. Plenty of Iraqi friends reminisce about the good old days of Saddam Hussein, when terrorist bombings were rare, when there were no blast walls and few checkpoints, when you could travel almost anywhere in Baghdad or Iraq without fear of being shot or kidnapped or beheaded. There was no freedom of speech, there was no democracy. Saddam ruled by fear, but at least there was rule. When you've tasted anarchy—and Iraq has had its fill of it—dictatorship doesn't look so bad," writes CNN’s Ben Wedeman.
"Was the invasion the wrong policy? Yes. Was it as wrong as anything in British foreign policy since Suez in 1956? Yes. Has the Iraq invasion been a disaster? Yes. Did it change modern British politics for the worse? Yes. Will it haunt the reputation of Tony Blair for ever? Absolutely. But the problem on the day of the publication of the Chilcot inquiry is that we have known most of these things since 2003. Some of us warned about them long before the invasion. Not all the disasters of Iraq were easily foreseeable. But lots were both foreseeable and foreseen. Hindsight, as Chilcot quietly but devastatingly put it, was not required," Martin Kettle writes for the Guardian.
"The US, architect of the war, has largely moved on from such events. But in the UK, the aftermath is still unravelling. The war remains a reference point for sceptics of official expertise and critics of the centre left. It has cast a shadow over British foreign policy ever since," Henry Mance writes for the Financial Times.