Blair knighthood

[Mummyrowland]

Nearly half a million people have signed a petition over his knighthood in 48 hours.

It should be removed and he shouldn't be awarded it.

After all what did he do that was good?

What about all the squaddies he sent to their deaths over the supposed wmds?

High ranking members of the armed forces are threatening resignation if his award isn't reconsider

So @luckylavender I'm not allowed to say I can't stand the man who sent my dad on a wild goose chase in Iraq?
Who lied and caused the deaths of hundreds thousands of men , women and children.
All because I don't sit everyday reading up on politics??

@drinkingwineoutofamug - you can say whatever you want. But your pastiche of the Queen was very poor satire.

Wasn't intended to be funny.

Just hopeful

I known you are different I just have never met a veteran wife who served in Falklands disagreeing

...who didn't start wars that lead to the death of hundreds of thousands of people and then took a role as peace envoy in the region and earned millions of pounds from it.

[quote madisonbridges]@Blossomtoes Of course all conflict results in loss of life. But surely there's a difference in attitude towards a PM starting a conflict and one defending British lives from an aggressor.[/quote]
The end result is the same whatever the motive.

Have you forgotten about the twin towers and 3000 people who died terrible deaths, many jumping out of the building, preferring to die through impact than roasting to death? Or the 1000s of Kurds gassed or 10s of 1000s of Marsh Arabs killed and relocated. Saddam and the Taliban caused these wars, not Blair or Bush.

Saddam committed many atrocities but I think intelligence reports now conclude Saddam had few links with Al-Qaeda/Bin Laden. Saddam not an Islamist. Think Saudi Arabia more likely linked with Al-Q.

Planet Normal expresses well my thoughts on Blair.

@Blossomtoes
@madisonbridges. Of course all conflict results in loss of life. But surely there's a difference in attitude towards a PM starting a conflict and one defending British lives from an aggressor.

The end result is the same whatever the motive.

But the feeling and judgement is different.
Driving within speed limit, child runs in front of car. Driver not to blame. Peoole sympathetic to driver.
Drunk driver hits child on zebra crossing. Child dies. Driver guilty of an offence and no one sympathetic.

@DirectionToPerfection

Anyone who can seriously portray Churchill as a saint in comparison to Blair really needs to educate themselves.

Churchill was a vile, racist, murderous bastard.

...who didn't start wars that lead to the death of hundreds of thousands of people and then took a role as peace envoy in the region and earned millions of pounds from it. Saint Tony.

To those arguing that any PM would have followed USA into war, Harold Wilson decided to keep us out of Viet Nam.

[quote madisonbridges]@Blossomtoes Of course all conflict results in loss of life. But surely there's a difference in attitude towards a PM starting a conflict and one defending British lives from an aggressor.[/quote]
Well, Churchill was largely concerned with defending the Empire. Those references are always nipped out of his famous speeches.

They are both complex men with complex legacies.

@PlanetNormal thanks for expressing the ambivalence that I feel so well.

I’d commend reading the Miles Goslett book about David Kelly, because the inquiry into his death was shocking. Whilst that is the effect on one family of the Blair government, in a global sense many families did benefit and there again is the ambivalence I feel.

For me the honours system is deeply flawed and this debate highlights some of the reasons for that belief.

@Luredbyapomegranate
All people are complex. I'm sure I have more in common with views of a man born in 1953, so quite close to my own age, and a man born in 1874.
But it wasn't me who compared them, it was another poster who said that churchill had sent squaddies to their death. I was saying that Churchill was defending his country from an aggressor whilst Blair was an aggressor who went to war on information he knew, wasn't true. (According to Geoff Hoon, Defence secretary.)

Any links to Geoff Hoon saying that @madisonbridges? I can’t find any, although I can find him justifying the use of cluster bombs.

@Blossomtoes

Any links to Geoff Hoon saying that *@madisonbridges*? I can’t find any, although I can find him justifying the use of cluster bombs.

I can't quote it but he was on the the Blair/Brown TV interview, either episode 3 or 4. He thpught they should correct some untruths that were going around but Blair and Campbell told him no.

But that series was made in the last couple of years. Of course he’d say that now, I’m pretty sure he didn’t at the time. And, even if he did, he should have resigned if Blair wouldn’t listen to him. I’m not buying it.

Great PM who is sorely missed when you look at the absolute shit-show we are living through now. The sense of optimism when Labour won in 1997 was amazing - I can't imagine ever feeling like that again when you look at how life is now, and I don't even mean Covid. Asterity, Brexit, corruption, Windrush - just an endless stream of awful things that cost us all financially and have stripped the country of its international status and moral core.

Iraq was a massive mistake but this idea that he 'started a war' as if everything was fine over there and he just went in is ridiculous. And the comparisons to the Falklands - as if that was some kind of honourable war are also ridiculous.

And I wouldn't get excited about the petition - between 2016-2019 there were so many petitions designed to prevent/slow down Brexit and they all got to a couple of million and look at where we are now. Those petitions are a pointless exercise in trying to create the impression we have a bit of control, when we really don't (aside from elections, obviously).

Did you watch that interview @Blossomtoes? It was very interesting, although large parts of the premiership were left out. I had quite admired TB in the past but I thought he didn't come across, well. Conversely GB, who I'd thought of as moody and truculent, I thought came across as quite thoughtful with quite good ambitions for equalling up. Just shows, we can't know people until we know them!

Sorry @Blossomtoes. We cross posted. You call GH a liar. I can't say whether he is or not. Maybe he just stuck to collective responsibility. But the things he said that were untrue, like the 45minutes, were in fact untrue. And I don't think it's hard to imagine Campbell putting the hard squeeze on.

@madisonbridges Obviously you feel strongly about this but please remember the wars in Iraq (both of them) would haver happened anyway, George Bush Jnr was always going to invade, the UK just lent it a little legitimacy, the 100s of 1000s killed would have still died.

Blix was never going to find WMD's with Saddam still in charge and Saddam did have them, ask the Kurds?

Its all very well being wise after the event but had Saddam still had just a small amount of nerve gas and then used them on Israel or in Europe, the wests lack of action would have been heavily criticised.

Also, the inquiry found Blair did not lie.

@DottyDoge

YABU, he was PM for 10 years and won three elections.

Labour don’t win elections. Tories lose them.

@coffeerevelsrock I agree with all you have said, the years between 1997 and even through to 2010 and the GFC in 2008 were utopia compared to what the Tories have took us through since 2010.

Should also be remembered that the GFA ended a conflict that saw 722 british soldiers murdered by terrorist's in NI, compared to 179 deaths in the 2nd Iraq war.... quite likely that without TB, many more would have died, i really don't see the likes of Cameron or Johnson winning over the IRA.

He tricked us into an illegal war. He should be in prison

Trying to find the petition now so I can sign it.