These were not compelling evidence of benefits to Britain  from joining the Iraq war. But they were then demolished by a letter from Mr Ian Paterson of the Iraq Policy Unit of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. He told me: “material benefits were never a consideration in taking the decision that British forces should participate in the military action in Iraq. The decision was based on the failure of Saddam’s regime to cooperate with the United Nations Security Council’s lawful demands to disarm and to cooperate with international inspectors which were contained in several UN Security Council resolutions.”

So that is why we invaded Iraq. We never expected or wanted any benefit for our country. We did it purely for love of the UN – to enforce its resolutions. The UN did not ask us to invade Iraq, and it even refused us a second resolution to authorize us to do so. But we loved the UN so much that we decided to invade Iraq anyway.

I would not like to give Mr Paterson’s reply to soldiers wounded or maimed in Iraq, or to the families of those killed there.  Perhaps that is why Tony Blair is so reluctant to meet them.

I do not reproach Mr Paterson: he is a civil servant, and civil servants often have to put their name to drivel on behalf of the government. However, his letter, and the entire government response to my question are a demonstration of bankruptcy. The government cannot think of any benefits to offset the costs of the war to our country or to justify the burden we have put on our forces.  

The war was supposed to make Britain safer. Instead we have more enemies than ever before. There is no country in the world where Britons are safer after the Iraq war – and that includes our own. The demands of the war have harmed our ability to deal with serious threats elsewhere, including Afghanistan, North Korea and Iran.  

The war was supposed to prevent Iraq giving support to terrorists. It is now a haven for terrorists of all kinds, and a major source of recruits and supplies.

The war was supposed to make Iraq a stable democracy. Iraq is now a charnel house, where the dead cannot be buried or counted and the living cope with the daily fear of robbery, extortion, kidnapping, rape, torture and murder. If Iraq ever becomes a working democracy its people, after their experience of occupation, are likely to hate our country and its allies and values for many years.

The war was supposed to give Tony Blair great influence over President George W Bush, although that was never a lawful or a moral reason for invading Iraq. But he has had no worthwhile influence on Bush’s policies and our forces have suffered from American failures and errors. As always, their fate is in American hands: if the Bush administration stays in Iraq, they stay, if it decides to cut and run we cut and run with them.

In war the British people normally come together and trust their government. Not in the Iraq war, which has divided our country and alienated entire communities from the British state itself. The British people have lost trust in their government, even when it tells the truth. This division and distrust have weakened all of Britain’s efforts against terrorism, at home and abroad.

The Iraq war has done nothing but harm to our country. We were propelled into it by a Prime Minister who has consistently refused to recognize the damage it has caused and who takes refuge in fantasy and false heroics. Reality never interferes with his vision of himself as a lonely King in Lord of the Rings, fighting for a good cause against the massed ranks of enemies and mockers.

Our country, and its armed forces in particular, will continue to suffer from the Iraq war until we get a Prime Minister with the courage or the common sense to admit that it was a giant mistake.