Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, May 1, 2005.
Meanwhile, with 4 days to go before the election both the Tories and Labour are trying to shift the debate onto anything else as they've both realised that the only party gaining anything from talking about the war are the Lib Dems.
This only confirms what I was saying to colleagues & friends from the start. That the war was going to happen regardless, that it was planned way further back and that the UN would be swept aside... for that reason, I was never so much against it as merely resigned to it. Apathetic, I know...
This is all a smoke screen, of course you plan an imminent invasion ahead of time, to say Blair was "already committed" is to say he'd decided it was going to happen regardless of the UK position and was making contingency plans ahead of time. Good policy if you ask me.
Blair didn't lie to the UK, no more than any politician lies every time he opens his mouth, his problem is the one he identified before the war started, it was going to be unpopular because it serves no purpose to the UK, it merely supports an aggression begun and prosecuted by the US, Bush specifically.
Had Saddam been murdering British kids, or dissing the queen, we'd have supported it more.
Blair knew this war could cost him the next election and he did it anyway, he's either a raving egomaniac (possible) or he thought it had to be done to support an ally that had supported us militarily over the years.
That's what friends do, watch your back.
Essentially Blair knew that refusing to support the US would cost this country billions in lost revenue and sour a relationship with the only super-power left.
Under the circumstances, he did the right thing, and is now asking the country to support him or not.
The bottom line is that he'll get lucky this time because no-one really wants Kennedy or the Tories back in power... not really.