To wonder who is more hated, Blair or Thatcher?

[WetAugust]

Seems that Blair is planning a return to UK politics.

blairachievedverylittle except for an illegal war I'd say Peace in Northern Ireland was quite a big thing.

I thought John Major started the peace talks.

Mo Mowlem and Tony Blair succeeded where others before hadn't.

Blair, mass murdering, war criminal.

Yes, they are both war criminals I reckon.

Has anyone mentioned the Falklands yet.

Send Blair, Thatcher and Cameron to the Falklands. Stick them in a small windswept hut together and leave. No food, only Pepsi for them to drink.

Blair. No brainer.

I mentioned the Belgrano.

You can't compare the Falklands to Iraq ffs, how little value do you place on Iraqi lives? Over five million Iraqis forced to flee as refugees, a couple of million more internally displaced Iraqis, God knows how many dead, documented 116,000 dead innocent civilians from violence alone but estimates rise to multiple times that depending on the source, civil war... compared with 649 Argentine military personnal who invaded the Island, 255 British military personnel who were sent out to protect it from invasion and 3 Falkland Islanders. The islanders supported the British. No comparision.

Totally agree, bobbledunk
I am constantly amazed by how many people in this country regularly ignore our Imperialist past, present and future. The problem with foreign policy is that is precisely that to the average voter, who frankly couldn't give a shit about what happens outside of their immediate community. We are all of us complicit in some way or other when another Iraqi kid gets blown to pieces by a car bomb, or NATO sanctions stop aid reaching the most vulnerable in Iran. We then wonder why we breed Islamist fanatics in our own communities.

What also irks is how badly funded our troops were in terms of equipment on the job, and aftercare when they got home. Incredible that Blair and Hoon, with not an ounce of military experience between them, were so cavalier about sending our men out there and on a pack of lies.

Things were horrible under Thatcher in the 80s if you lived somewhere like Middlesborough for example (still a bit of a ghost town.) But it's not quite the same as being bombed to shit now, is it?

Mopswerver
blairachievedverylittle except for an illegal war I'd say Peace in Northern Ireland was quite a big thing

There is a view that terrorism in Northern Ireland collapsed after the funding dried up. Many in the USA used to have a romantic view of the IRA and other groups, and there were affectionate lobbyists (still are but they are now less influential).

After 9/11 the US approach to terrorism changed and the money all but stopped.

I think Blair. I was very young when Thatcher came into power. I might be wrong but I don't think as many people died under very mysterious and suspicious circumstances as they did under Blair (David Kelly, Robin Cook, Jean de Menezes etc). Blair was hand in hand with those who wanted and still want to bring in a police state. Both set the scene for alienating their own populations though.

Only amongst the British Left could the sinking of an enemy warship, during a war, be considered a bad thing.

The loss of any life, in any war IS a bad thing. Any loss of life. It isn't politicians that fight on the front line.

Tam Dalyell's questions about the sinking of the Belgrano were very pertinent, because if it was such a necessary act of war, why would the government lie about the circumstances of its sinking? Dalyell unearthed evidence that far from being an immediate threat, the Belgrano - full of hundreds of teenage conscripts - was sailing away from the Exclusion Zone. Why lie about that? Possibly because the British Public wouldn't have kept banging the approval rating button for Thatcher?

It was a political, not a military decision. Three hundred and sixty-eight men died on that ship. In the ensuing conflict, which the Thtacher government had already decided was inevitable, ignoring all dipliomatic efforts by Peru and the USA, another thousand people died and the resulting garrison has cost the British taxpayers billions to maintain.

Thatcher! By a mile.

Of course Thatcher.

Blair I am disappointed with, but Thatcher I hate.

LineRunner

Tam Dalyell's questions about the sinking of the Belgrano were very pertinent, because if it was such a necessary act of war, why would the government lie about the circumstances of its sinking? Dalyell unearthed evidence that far from being an immediate threat, the Belgrano - full of hundreds of teenage conscripts - was sailing away from the Exclusion Zone. Why lie about that? Possibly because the British Public wouldn't have kept banging the approval rating button for Thatcher?

It makes no difference what the crew were, teenage, middle-aged or geriatric.

It was a political, not a military decision. Three hundred and sixty-eight men died on that ship.

It was a military decision. Not only was the Belgrano to the NW, the Vincento de Mayo (ex HMS Vengeance) was to the SE and the Task Force, which was already short of air cover since the Harriers had been engaging Super Etendards and Mirages, was vulnerable both to surface vessels and to another air strike. In fact, only the next day HMS Sheffield was sunk by an Exocet missile.

What would have happened if the Belgrano had been left and had got in amongst the Task Force 2 weeks later?

In the ensuing conflict, which the Thtacher government had already decided was inevitable, ignoring all dipliomatic efforts by Peru and the USA, another thousand people died and the resulting garrison has cost the British taxpayers billions to maintain.

Negotiations continued but the conclusions were rejected by the Argentinians, not the British.

Thatcher.

I've read to the end of the thread now and I actually feel more puzzled now. I genuinely do not understand the rabid hatred of Tony Blair.

Yes, we sent troops into Iraq. Alongside the Americans, who were spoiling for a fight after 9/11. I'm not happy that the evidence for intervention in Iraq was probably lies. I was very strongly against the Iraq war and for the first time ever, I wrote to my MP about it but many years on, I now think we should have gone into the war, even if just to restrain the Americans. Look what they got up to even when we were there! I am genuinely sorry that the people of Iraq have suffered...but many of them were already suffering under Saddam Hussein anyway.

I can't understand how people can think that one decision to send troops into war in a ten year Premiership of prosperity is as evil as destroying the jobs and life chances of millions of people, particularly in the North. Iraq will eventually sort itself out but 30 years on, people are still struggling with Thatcher's legacy

Thatcher's personally repugnant policies have damaged this country and it's people (hopefully not beyond repair) Blair was a bit of a prat.

i thought that there is 100s of years worth of coal still in the ground in britain, could the industry not have been reformed

there is, in narrow, deep, broken seams. paying a Brit to go a mile underground to get coal is not going to be as cheap as a Chilean or Indian blasting it out at surface level.

geology made Uk coal in many areas unprofitable well before 1979. especially without the captive market of the former empire...

There is coal in Britain. Deep underground. It will be worth a lot more in 50 or 100 years when the coal elsewhere is dwindling. Subsidising miners in this country to dig it would be absolutely stupid.

a ten year Premiership of prosperity is as evil as destroying the jobs and life chances of millions of people, particularly in the North

well there you have it.

Blair inherited an economy already in growth, and Thatcher inherited a government previously destroyed by a vote of no-confidence, inflation, joblessness, trade union disputes..etc etc etc - difficult times.

I think Thatcher's legacy is more insidious, toxic and long-lasting than Blair's. Though the erosion of civil liberties under Noo Labour is something I find hard to forgive.