Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Every now and then I remember exactly why I dislike Tony Blair so much

277 replies

Caligula · 05/01/2007 18:10

Like now, when he can't bring himself to comment on Saddam Hussein's execution.

Even Dubya has commented on it, FGS. What is the matter with that pusillanimous creep, our PM? Is he really so afraid of offending someone by saying the wrong thing? Why can't he comment?

Yuk yuk yuk yuk yuk, he's horrid.

There, feel a bit better now I've got that off my chest.

OP posts:
PinotGrigioLover · 06/01/2007 21:03

So who would be better than Tony Blair? I have no idea

nearlythree · 06/01/2007 21:05

Actually, Europe raises an interesting point - according to teh German Government Europe decides 80% of our legislation.

So we are voting for the other 20%.

And the Government can't even get that right.

yellowrose · 06/01/2007 21:07

Suzy, ah, but, yeh, but, ah, but...yeh...but DICK Cheney needed someone to look out for his arse, so we had to go in to
Ey-rak to get rid of those teeeerrrrisssstttts

Aloha · 06/01/2007 21:09

Dropsophilia, the personal crisis involved his daughter.

suzycreamcheese · 06/01/2007 21:09

yellowrose ..didn't help out just teeny tiny with ol profits of bechtel et al..the first privatised war, they should be proud really!

maybe thats it too many layers of governments and their big long gravy trains..

Socci · 06/01/2007 21:10

Message withdrawn

yellowrose · 06/01/2007 21:13

Well Suzy, one can't think other than Tony has turned our soldiers into "mercenaries" fighting wars on behalf of US multinationals (oil, construction, water, etc)

Socci · 06/01/2007 21:15

Message withdrawn

Socci · 06/01/2007 21:16

Message withdrawn

suzycreamcheese · 06/01/2007 21:19

well our special relationship with them allows british subjects to almost rot in a hell called guantamo bay
to extridit british subjects with no reciprocal policy
for us to be good listening / take off base for them in europe

yeh, would would've happened had we showed some balls i dont know..

think people get history slightly jumbled too..hollywood has good effect of pr machine imo they didnt bother turning up at the start of our other two world wars but came out grabbing glory in both cases..
if we had stuck with europe it could've been different thats all
thats what i meant about being like a lord of the rings uber evil versus good story..do you go with them just because you think they will win..what on earth did we fight 2nd world war for? they are the new nazis

yellowrose · 06/01/2007 21:20

But Socci - I accept "real politik" as an argument, except Iraq and Afghanistan are NOT and never will be in our global political interests.

Have you read what the Foreign Office has been saying about these wars ? If our career diplomats, the people who are actually working on the ground as it were, who are responsible for creating good relations between us and other nations, say we have f*ed up big time, I think we need to sit down and think that supporting Bush may not have been such a bright idea.

nearlythree · 06/01/2007 21:23

Somehow I don't see even Dubya nuking us. And because we are in the EU our trade with the US is subject to whatever wranglings are going on between the US and EU. Hard to see what else he could have done to us? I mean, with our armed services being pared down to nothing Gordon Brown has already signalled the end of us being a 'superpower'.

I just think Blair wanted his Churchillian moment and picked the wrong war.

Socci · 06/01/2007 21:27

Message withdrawn

Caligula · 06/01/2007 21:29

You know though, much as I agree that minmimum wage, workers rights, tax credits etc. are a Good Thing, I don't give Tony Blair credit for them.

They were stuff which the majority of his party wanted and even he has to have some labour policies.

Also, anyone who thinks we now have a living wage in this country is living in cloud cuckoo land. You try buying a house on minimum wage. Or going on holiday. Or running a car. Or using your local sports centre. Or doing any of those things which count as social inclusion. The joke about the miminum wage is that it is so low so as not to frighten employers, but it is too low to lift anyone on it out of poverty.

OP posts:
Roskvawantingsomesunshine · 06/01/2007 21:29

The terrorism act is the first step in making this a one party country. Remember the old labour activist who was arrested under it for heckling Jack Straw? Sooner or later they will start using it to silence people who speak out against them. Oh, and I seem to remember the parliament act being used to force through legislation that kept getting stuck in the house of lords. GB uses the finance act to enable undebated things that afffect all of us financially to be passed into law under secondary legislation, which does not need to debated in parliament. There are more CCTV cameras in this country than in the rest of Europe. Our childrens' details are going to be entered onto a national database without our consent, and we are going to have to pay to carry compulsory ID cards containing more information than any other country in the world requires of its citizens. And who brought all this in? New labour. It's an illusion that this country is still a democracy, 2 party or otherwise, which is why TB and co need so many spin doctors to keep us believing it.

suzycreamcheese · 06/01/2007 21:30

and iraq & afganistan
if we check back history books we were there too in 1920's dividing borders making 'iraq' after end of first world war; and fighting for long time in afganistan too

it didnt work then and it wont work now

importance of these places: its to do with major gas / oil pipelines.
the middle east must not, it seems, be allowed to prosper by right of its mineral and oil abundance and reserves..according to US and their allies

foxinsocks · 06/01/2007 21:30

oh I think Blair wanted to go to war - definitely. I think the main problem wasn't necessarily the war itself just that (for some reason) no-one thought through what would happen after they deposed Saddam.

I don't think either America or UK (or anyone in Europe for that matter) had proper and reliable intelligence from that region at the time (and the 9/11 bombings and other terrorist activities bear that out). They didn't understand the complexities involved with Iraq. I cannot see what they thought would happen after they had deposed Saddam? It seemed like they/we thought we could just 'help' an (approved) candidate in the election and all of the Iraqis would be singing in the street at their new democracy. How shortsighted could they have been!

Even the Americans are now asking serious questions about whether they should still be in Iraq.

suzycreamcheese · 06/01/2007 21:32

roskva..hey dont forget the girl chanting the names of dead from iraq war, too close to downing st..
our democratically elected government is so scared of us that we cannot demonstrate nor even sing song within their sight or sound?

yea, we're living the dream alright! of an orwellian nightmare..

yellowrose · 06/01/2007 21:37

What would have happened if we weren't Bush's slaves ?

Well, I think we would now enjoy better relations with our European neighbours and also enjoy better relations with the Arab and Muslim world.

Britain has historically enjoyed very good relations with the Arab world (as the former colonial power), now pretty much destroyed because it is no longer seen as a referee between Israel and Palestine. We are seen as almost as pro-Israel as the Jewish lobby in the US. Remember our response to the bloody invasion of Lebanon ?

It all depends on how you view world politics, you can always go out shooting from the hip (al la Bush, et al) or you can use your brain, rationalise and reason to find a solution.

suzycreamcheese · 06/01/2007 21:37

fox..think they didn't care more like.
shock and awe was meant to sort everything out, and they could place USA friendly government..but reality very different and they had not enough respect for their 'enemy' i.e. liberated iraqi nation to have back up plan

i mean did no one think it funny that we supplied weapons to this man for many years to keep his dictarship intact? then suddenly he's not our pal any longer?

i mean ffs ..after invasion USA sacked the iraqi army and civil service! they should've gone to hollywood for battle plan because it would've been better than theirs!

Socci · 06/01/2007 21:41

Message withdrawn

yellowrose · 06/01/2007 21:42

Well yes, us Channel 4 viewers forget that Big Brother isn't just a crap tv show full of weirdo's, but a term coined by Orwel to describe totalitarian states (USSR at his time), the UK now !

Roskvawantingsomesunshine · 06/01/2007 21:44

Putting an 'approved' candidate in power in other countries has sometimes worked for the US in the past, a certain late general Pinochet being one such, and what's-his-name in Indonesia in the 1960s another. What it does for the people of the countries involved rarely gets any consideration. OK, so they failed miserably in Vietnam, and managed to provoke Iran into revolution which put Khomeini in power in the first place and unleashed islamic fundamentalism as a political force. The problem is they don't seem to get it that trying to force other countries and cultures into playing the lapdog doesn't work.

suzycreamcheese · 06/01/2007 21:45

yellowrose..he actually wrote big brother about post war britain..must read it again soon actually has been years since

Roskvawantingsomesunshine · 06/01/2007 21:45

So Suzy, how long do you reckon before they shut this thread down?