Blair gets Commons backing for war on Iraq
Up to 139 Labour MPs are believed to have voted against his hardline stance on Iraq, despite a day of arm-twisting by the whips.
If the figure is confirmed by analysis of the division list later it will be a bigger revolt than the 122-strong rebellion last month, with more than half of Labour backbenchers opposing the government.
The rebel cross-party amendment, insisting the case for war had not yet been established, was defeated by 396 votes to 217, a government majority of 179.
But the scale of support for it served as another severe setback for Mr Blair after the resignation of three ministers, including Commons leader Robin Cook, over military action against Saddam Hussein.
At the end of a highly-charged nine-and-a-half-hour emergency debate in the run-up to conflict, the British Government's motion supporting the use of "all means necessary" to disarm Iraq was carried by 412 votes to 149, majority 263.
Mr Blair put his own authority starkly on the line in a combative and passionate 48-minute opening speech, hinting that he would be prepared to resign if MPs voted against military action at the end of the crunch debate.
"I would not be party to such a course," he said.
But with the Tories lining up in support of the government, and despite angry anti-war protests outside Parliament and in the Commons public gallery, Mr Blair gained the backing he needed as the countdown to war entered its final phase.
After the vote, Mr Blair's official spokesman urged Parliament and the country to rally behind the British troops preparing for battle.
"It is now time for all of us in Parliament and in the country to come together and show the support our Armed Forces deserve," he said.
Appealing for support during the debate for a course of action he believed in "passionately", Mr Blair said it would shape the future pattern of international politics.
It was "palpably absurd" to suggest Saddam had changed. He was "playing the same old games in the same old way" in defying UN resolutions.
Two "begetters of chaos" tyrannical regimes with weapons of mass destruction and extreme terror groups were now a "real and present danger" to Britain.
Mr Blair said it was a "tragedy" that the diplomatic route had been blocked by the French veto threat and military action was now "the only sure way" to proceed.
"Back away from this confrontation now and future conflicts will be infinitely worse and more devastating in their effects," he warned. If British troops were pulled back now what then?
"What will Saddam feel? Strengthened beyond measure. What will the other states who tyrannise their people, the terrorists who threaten our existence, what will they take from that? That the will confronting them is decaying and feeble.
"The House wanted this discussion before conflict. That was a legitimate demand. It has it and these are the choices.
"In this dilemma no choice is perfect, no choice is ideal, but on this decision hangs the fate of many things.To retreat now, I believe, would put at hazard all that we hold dearest."
Tory Leader Iain Duncan Smith backed the Government position, saying the use of military force was "in the British national interest".
He called on the Government to make clear its plans to deal with the humanitarian fall out of a war.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
