If you bump into Blair

[kabbes]

So is that why the French rushed into the war too, then? Because they had no choice in the matter? Realpolitik being what it is and all that.

 

[LLETSA]

So what's your answer then? That we should just forgive and forget? Or should we actually hold him to account, even if only in the court of public opinion?

If he can be held to account then he should be, although it isn't the most important issue we face.

But as should be clear from what I've already said, he didn't behave any worse than any conceivable British PM would have done under the circumstances. Can you imagine how Thatcher would have reacted to the same pressures? Or Brown or Cameron?

 

[kabbes]

I didn't vote for Thatcher either and I won't be voting for Brown or Cameron.

If you want to vote for the kind of character that will fabricate evidence to persuade the British people to go to war on the grounds that it is what "anyone would do" then knock yourself out. Personally, I'll continue to think that he's a weasel.

 

[LLETSA]

So is that why the French rushed into the war too, then? Because they had no choice in the matter? Realpolitik being what it is and all that.

The French aren't subject to the same pressures from the US. Although neither they nor any other country that distanced itself from the war exactly did all that much about it (not that they could have done.)

 

[LLETSA]

I didn't vote for Thatcher either and I won't be voting for Brown or Cameron.

If you want to vote for the kind of character that will fabricate evidence to persuade the British people to go to war on the grounds that it is what "anyone would do" then knock yourself out. Personally, I'll continue to think that he's a weasel.

I don't want to vote for them. I never said I did.

I bet Blair's really upset at being thought a weasal as he rakes in his millions.

 

[kabbes]

Once again, I can only query what point you are trying to make. Because you are giving every impressiom that you think that we should simply shrug at the actions of Blair on the grounds that it is what "any PM would have done" (despite the fact that the French didn't do it). But that's a nonsensical, circular argument. And irrelevamt to boot.

 

[LLETSA]

Once again, I can only query what point you are trying to make. Because you are giving every impressiom that you think that we should simply shrug at the actions of Blair on the grounds that it is what "any PM would have done" (despite the fact that the French didn't do it). But that's a nonsensical, circular argument. And irrelevamt to boot.

As I said, any British PM is what I meant. The French have always had a different relationship with the US.

I never actually advocated any action regarding Blair, although it is difficult to see what the likes of yourself are doing other than ranting impotently.

 

[paulhackett]

Surely things such as the Official Secrets Act would point to the fact that all govts. withhold information and are therefore economical with the truth?

Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown have all utilised troops.. not to excuse Blair.

Anyway, why bump into him when you can just go round his house? It's the one with the armed police front and back..

 

[kabbes]

As I said, any British PM is what I meant. The French have always had a different relationship with the US.

I never actually advocated any action regarding Blair, although it is difficult to see what the likes of yourself are doing other than ranting impotently.

I'm merely choosing to count his actions against his character. No more, no less. And yet you seem to be taking issue with this.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Sounds very like an event I was at. I think it was guns this time. "guns out of manchester, guns out of Iraq" comes back to me.

He got out of the car, smiled and did a cheesy wave before realising that dozens of people were shouting at him in very angry fashion.

Ah, sorry, yes, you're quite right, it was gun crime.

And yes, I think the deluded fool was expecting a warmer reception for his 'goodwill' mission than was actually delivered to him.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

I bet that made him think.

Well, in larger scheme of things it's insignificant.

But Blair was/is/seems to be a totally deluded 'emperor wearing no clothes' type of leader who was shielded by yes men and functionaries too afraid of falling out of favour to give him honest counsel and tell him how fucked up his plans were and how hated he was outside the rarified walls of Westminster.

He really needs a reality check, people outside his inner circle to tell him he's butt naked.

 

[LLETSA]

Well, in larger scheme of things it's insignificant.

But Blair was/is/seems to be a totally deluded 'emperor wearing no clothes' type of leader who was shielded by yes men and functionaries too afraid of falling out of favour to give him honest counsel and tell him how fucked up his plans were and how hated he was outside the rarified walls of Westminster.

He really needs a reality check, people outside his inner circle to tell him he's butt naked.

So hated was he that, as somebody points out above, he was re-elected in the General Election that followed the invasion of Iraq.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Erm, he wasn't re-elected as PM in the General Election, he was re-elected by his Sedgefield constituents, not the same thing at all, really.

A lot of people might have been happy with their local constituency MP and the work they were doing (before they found out about the expense claims scandal that is).

And most people didn't vote for Blair or Labour, it's misleading to interpret apathy or people staying away from the polls because they don't want to vote for any of the candidates as popular support for those who did get in.

 

[LLETSA]

Erm, he wasn't re-elected as PM in the General Election, he was re-elected by his Sedgefield constituents, not the same thing at all, really.

A lot of people might have been happy with their local constituency MP and the work they were doing (before they found out about the expense claims scandal that is).

And most people didn't vote for Blair or Labour, it's misleading to interpret apathy or people staying away from the polls because they don't want to vote for any of the candidates as popular support for those who did get in.

I suppose it's a different thing if you consider Blair as something seperate from the party he led. You know-the party whose MPs and other representatives overwhelmingly agreed with him on the declared need to go to war?

A lot of people did indeed vote against him or stay away from the polls, but there is no evidence that their primary motivation was disgust over Iraq. In fact, weren't the majority of those who voted against Labour-Tory voters-overwhemigly in favour of the war as well? As were a clear majority of the Tory candidates they voted for.

The whole Iraq fiasco stinks-but it was nowhere near as unpopular as is supposed by those who spent much time actively opposing it.

 

[kabbes]

Actually, 22% of the electorate voted for Labour and 20% voted for the Tories, meaning that 58% of the electorate did not care to vote for either. So it's not true that a majority of people voted for warmongers.

 

[LLETSA]

Actually, 22% of the electorate voted for Labour and 20% voted for the Tories, meaning that 58% of the electorate did not care to vote for either. So it's not true that a majority of people voted for warmongers.

Read my post again-I never said that a majority did.

It still doesn't prove that a majority of the population opposed the war though.