My guess is that the very last people who will admit they were staggeringly, horribly, catastrophically wrong about Iraq are the neocon or Blair-groupie journos.  Even though Blair has admitted the situation in Iraq is a ‘disaster’ (without accepting responsibility for having caused it, natch) and even if he were later to hold up his hands and say, ‘Yeah, OK, I’m a pretty straight kind of guy, but Alastair messed with that dossier’, the journos would still be cleaving to their original line that the invasion was wholly justified, maybe not on the original grounds that Saddam was about to nuke or gas us all, but on new grounds they’ve just made up.  They will be the last to say that they were wrong.  David Aaronovitch wrote in 2003 that he would never vote Labour again if no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq; but somehow he has been able to extricate himself from this sticky little wicket (it would take too long and be wholly pointless to explain quite how).  I suppose it’s all because the journalists are less answerable to history and public opinion than their political heroes and more vulnerable to attacks of grand hubris. ~Rod Liddle

They are often also among the first to jump off the bandwagon and declare, complete with shocked and bewildered expression, that if they had any idea that the government would have made such a mess of things they would never have supported the war in the first place.  They’re remarkably adaptable and yet strangely inflexible people–they bear no responsibility for the policies they push in the public square, but they have this profound sense of their own righteousness because they advocated for high-minded wars of liberation.