Why is Tony Blair so unpopular?
Discussion
rich888 said:
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
Rubbish...
There's something quite ironical about your calling my post rubbish, then going on to include virtually everything including PFI in your attempt to justify your earlier claim that Blair killed thousands of Iraqi civilians.By all means dislike or even hate Blair, there's plenty of valid reasons to do so, but let's keep it real, shall we?
As for 'rubbish', you stated that most civilians in Iraq war were killed by other civilians and that clearly isn't the case.
Yes there are other politicians who have made some pretty poor decisions over the years, but this thread is directed specifically at why Blair is so unpopular.
I'm well aware what the topic of this thread is, and I stated there are plenty of real reasons for despising Blair, no need to make others up and it weakens the case against him when you do.
hidetheelephants said:
Given the PH demographic I'm surprised at some of the commentary about the Iraq war; there were some perfectly reasonable moral and legal arguments for the war to choose from and I'm quite glad the Hussein family no longer reigns in Iraq, murdering and terrorising its citizens and treating it as personal property. That such a transparently b
ks argument was deployed as justification is ultimately his fault, discrediting what should have been a straightforwardly just war in accordance with international law.
He bears a large share of the blame for the policy vacuum that existed where there should have been a post-war rehabilitation plan as happened in Germany and to a more qualified degree in South Korea and Sierra Leone. This is a far more egregious offence than the 45 minutes nonsense and has lead directly to the baleful influence of the Iranian mullahs, mass sectarian slaughter and further destruction of civil society, leading on to the rise of the vile death cult of IS.
As for Syria, that's a completely different can of middle eastern worms; there was little appetite for the proposed intervention given how vague it was, the gordian knot of who we would be fighting for and against and how pear-shaped the half-arsed intervention in Libya went. I find it difficult to believe Cameron really wanted the intervention, he just perceived political gain from appearing willing but stymied by pacifists.
The smarm, the ostentatious piety, the oxymoronic peace envoy appointment, the venal moneygrubbing plus questionable tax avoidance since he left office are enough of an indictment on their own, although I'm quite happy to lay some of the blame for the green bks at his door too; where the UK needed an energy policy there was a 13 year vacuum filled with whirligigs and american woodchips. The sucking parasites on the taxpayer that are PFI and tax credits. Uncontrolled immigration. The spinning bowtie extravaganza that was drowning the NHS in cash while simultaneously creating horrors like Stafford Hospital; I'd readily acknowledge that all governments fk up the NHS, but most restrict themselves to doing so through budget cuts. And that fking dome, don't forget the bloody millennium fking dome. The Kosovo travesty. Cool Britannia was st too. While I'm at it he can take the blame for Nimrod MRA4, FRES and the carriers fk-ups. And the fking deification of bloody Diana. He's an arse. Thank fk he never ended up as President of the EU; Von Rompuy was preferable.
Some reasonable points but the Gordian Knot analogy doesn't work - Alexander (literally) cut through all the crap and solved the problem in one swift bold stroke. You could argue the comparative solution would be to nuke the region and take out all the actors in one go.ks argument was deployed as justification is ultimately his fault, discrediting what should have been a straightforwardly just war in accordance with international law.He bears a large share of the blame for the policy vacuum that existed where there should have been a post-war rehabilitation plan as happened in Germany and to a more qualified degree in South Korea and Sierra Leone. This is a far more egregious offence than the 45 minutes nonsense and has lead directly to the baleful influence of the Iranian mullahs, mass sectarian slaughter and further destruction of civil society, leading on to the rise of the vile death cult of IS.
As for Syria, that's a completely different can of middle eastern worms; there was little appetite for the proposed intervention given how vague it was, the gordian knot of who we would be fighting for and against and how pear-shaped the half-arsed intervention in Libya went. I find it difficult to believe Cameron really wanted the intervention, he just perceived political gain from appearing willing but stymied by pacifists.
The smarm, the ostentatious piety, the oxymoronic peace envoy appointment, the venal moneygrubbing plus questionable tax avoidance since he left office are enough of an indictment on their own, although I'm quite happy to lay some of the blame for the green b
ks at his door too; where the UK needed an energy policy there was a 13 year vacuum filled with whirligigs and american woodchips. The sucking parasites on the taxpayer that are PFI and tax credits. Uncontrolled immigration. The spinning bowtie extravaganza that was drowning the NHS in cash while simultaneously creating horrors like Stafford Hospital; I'd readily acknowledge that all governments fk up the NHS, but most restrict themselves to doing so through budget cuts. And that fking dome, don't forget the bloody millennium fking dome. The Kosovo travesty. Cool Britannia was st too. While I'm at it he can take the blame for Nimrod MRA4, FRES and the carriers fk-ups. And the fking deification of bloody Diana. He's an arse. Thank fk he never ended up as President of the EU; Von Rompuy was preferable.RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
Rubbish...
There's something quite ironical about your calling my post rubbish, then going on to include virtually everything including PFI in your attempt to justify your earlier claim that Blair killed thousands of Iraqi civilians.By all means dislike or even hate Blair, there's plenty of valid reasons to do so, but let's keep it real, shall we?
As for 'rubbish', you stated that most civilians in Iraq war were killed by other civilians and that clearly isn't the case.
Yes there are other politicians who have made some pretty poor decisions over the years, but this thread is directed specifically at why Blair is so unpopular.
I'm well aware what the topic of this thread is, and I stated there are plenty of real reasons for despising Blair, no need to make others up and it weakens the case against him when you do.
Tell me, you do seem to be rather protective over Tony Blair, are you being paid to write your comments, if so, by whom?
ash73 said:
hidetheelephants said:
...discrediting what should have been a straightforwardly just war in accordance with international law.
The UK/US invasion of Iraq was unilateral, and not in accordance with international law.United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan - "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it was illegal. The security council warned Iraq in resolution 1441 there would be consequences if it did not comply with its demands. But it should have been up to the security council to determine what those consequences were".
here
There is also an argument that preemption applies too, but that's more debatable; it's also one that has rarely been used(by us at any rate), even where we would have been fully justified in doing so, like the Enosis and subsequent Turkish invasion in Cyprus, where we knew what was about to happen and were obliged by treaty to protect Cyprus but cravenly refused to do so, or the UDI situation in Rhodesia.
You could argue that some of those offences were, by 2003 at any rate, historical rather than ongoing, but there is no statute of limitations applicable here just as there is none applied to war crimes. As always it's down to interpretation; in national terms if the Attorney General is willing to produce advice that it's legal then it's legal more or less, regardless of whether Kofi Annan approves or not.
Blair was a wolf in sheep's clothing...and don't get me started on Cherie, I cannot stand that woman! She'd sell her granny if she thought she'd get any publicity from it.
Unfortunately, the 'benefit' culture was taken too far - too much money spent on things that people didn't really 'need' and as a result costs spiraled out of control.
Unfortunately, the 'benefit' culture was taken too far - too much money spent on things that people didn't really 'need' and as a result costs spiraled out of control.
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
You've lost me now, which bits did I make up?
Tell me, you do seem to be rather protective over Tony Blair, are you being paid to write your comments, if so, by whom?
The bit about him killing thousands of civilians in Iraq.Tell me, you do seem to be rather protective over Tony Blair, are you being paid to write your comments, if so, by whom?
Paid? Stop being a t
t. Blair is a .No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
rich888 said:
If you want some idea of how many civilians died in the Iraq war you could always look at the statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ir...
No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
It's not that they were killed that is the issue, it's whether or not Blair killed them, and he didn't.No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
ash73 said:
You may view the war to be justified in your opinion, but the fact is the war was illegal because Blair acted unilaterally while disregarding the advice of the United Nations Secretary General and the Attorney General.
It wasn't legal in terms of 1441 for sure; Blair was asking the wrong question and understandably Goldsmith didn't want to sign his name to a lie. There were ample grounds under the genocide convention and probably others. It's quite hard to take the UN seriously as the ultimate arbiter in such cases after Rwanda, the security council is more often than not a block to such prophylaxis.Why the hell do we have to wait 100 years to find out the names of the Labour ministers who got caught buying child porn in Operation Ore?
Is it because we followed the USA into an illegal war to protect Tony's perverted friends?
Name the nonces. No excuses.
Is it because we followed the USA into an illegal war to protect Tony's perverted friends?
Name the nonces. No excuses.
Edited by dudleybloke on Friday 21st August 17:44
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
If you want some idea of how many civilians died in the Iraq war you could always look at the statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ir...
No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
It's not that they were killed that is the issue, it's whether or not Blair killed them, and he didn't.No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
If he's innocent of any wrongdoings over the war in Iraq then why hasn't the Chilcot report been published in its raw format, and why has it still not been published even though over six years have passed.
Blair being arrested and tried at the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes really would make my day.
rich888 said:
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
If you want some idea of how many civilians died in the Iraq war you could always look at the statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ir...
No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
It's not that they were killed that is the issue, it's whether or not Blair killed them, and he didn't.No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
If he's innocent of any wrongdoings over the war in Iraq then why hasn't the Chilcot report been published in its raw format, and why has it still not been published even though over six years have passed.
Blair being arrested and tried at the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes really would make my day.
The people that did the killing were not under Blair's orders, so to accuse him of the killings is obviously wrong and distracts from the many valid reason for people to hate him.
Countdown said:
Blair won 3 elections. He would probably have won 4 if he'd continued as Leader.
Outside of PH he wasn't that unpopular.
Agreed. That was a distinct possibility. PH Political bias overkill imbalance is never a true indicator and unlikely ever to be. Had he gone for a fourth, I'd had voted Labour again for the fourth "Blair" Time. ... and final time for Labour. Unlikely ever to do so again.Outside of PH he wasn't that unpopular.
Incredible the number of folks who are so much wiser ..... after the event ... fashionable even ..
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
RobinOakapple said:
rich888 said:
If you want some idea of how many civilians died in the Iraq war you could always look at the statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Ir...
No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
It's not that they were killed that is the issue, it's whether or not Blair killed them, and he didn't.No more delay tactics, it's time for the Chilcot report to be published.
If he's innocent of any wrongdoings over the war in Iraq then why hasn't the Chilcot report been published in its raw format, and why has it still not been published even though over six years have passed.
Blair being arrested and tried at the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes really would make my day.
The people that did the killing were not under Blair's orders, so to accuse him of the killings is obviously wrong and distracts from the many valid reason for people to hate him.
Their goal wasn't just to depose Saddam Hussein or they could have just sent in crack SAS team or a lone sniper to blow his head off, oh no, they went in full bore and destroyed the entire infrastructure of the country in order to seize the oil and do whatever else they could think up to generate future revenue. They obviously never considered what would happen in the aftermath when Hussein was dead and buried and the various warring factions were able to roam the streets free to kill whoever, whenever and wherever they wanted.
Now we have an even more unsafe and unstable world to live in, and all thanks to these two megalomaniacs who really should have known better.
In the meantime Blair swans around the world enjoying the finer things in life and earning millions more for himself, (estimated wealth £100,000,000+ to date) not bad someone who was once the leader of the Labour party and Prime Minister of the UK, and was supposed to be a socialist rather than a capitalist in his beliefs, or is this the new breed, the 'Champagne Socialist', do as I say not as I do, or so aptly put in Animal Farm, 'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others'.
Blair has much blood on his hands over Iraq, he should be arrested and tried at the International Criminal Court in The Hague for war crimes against humanity.
MGJohn said:
Countdown said:
Blair won 3 elections. He would probably have won 4 if he'd continued as Leader.
Outside of PH he wasn't that unpopular.
Agreed. That was a distinct possibility. PH Political bias overkill imbalance is never a true indicator and unlikely ever to be. Had he gone for a fourth, I'd had voted Labour again for the fourth "Blair" Time. ... and final time for Labour. Unlikely ever to do so again.Outside of PH he wasn't that unpopular.
Incredible the number of folks who are so much wiser ..... after the event ... fashionable even ..
Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Saturday 22 August 23:46
Never been more relevant has it:-
Politicians hide themselves away,
They only started the war.
Why should they go out to fight,
They leave that all to the poor.
Time will tell them they are Power Blind,
Making war just for fun.
Treating people just like pawns in chess,
Wait till their judgment day comes.
Politicians hide themselves away,
They only started the war.
Why should they go out to fight,
They leave that all to the poor.
Time will tell them they are Power Blind,
Making war just for fun.
Treating people just like pawns in chess,
Wait till their judgment day comes.
Mr GrimNasty said:
MGJohn said:
Countdown said:
Blair won 3 elections. He would probably have won 4 if he'd continued as Leader.
Outside of PH he wasn't that unpopular.
Agreed. That was a distinct possibility. PH Political bias overkill imbalance is never a true indicator and unlikely ever to be. Had he gone for a fourth, I'd had voted Labour again for the fourth "Blair" Time. ... and final time for Labour. Unlikely ever to do so again.Outside of PH he wasn't that unpopular.
Incredible the number of folks who are so much wiser ..... after the event ... fashionable even ..
The grim and nasty fact is that what you say applies to just about most every UK GE does it not?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff