Sb is right about it being "hot and sticky" but because of that the bikes are not a good idea. The hop on, hop off bus is the way to go, stops at all the places you'll want to see.
Off Topic The Politics Thread
- Thread starter Stroller
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Sb is right about it being "hot and sticky" but because of that the bikes are not a good idea. The hop on, hop off bus is the way to go, stops at all the places you'll want to see.
"We probably wouldn't know"? It's your post, your opinion I suppose. But not everybody's, so it is not we.
I wonder? Blair sent our soldiers to war on a lie. It cost the lives of nearly 300 UK troops and god knows how many Iraqi civilians. It also cost the life of my partner's school friend leaving a wife and 2 kids. Ask her about what she thinks of Blair.
so when i say WE i am referring to the majority who knows what a **** Blair is.
But if people want to stick up for that tw2nt then that is upto them.
The best of, at best, a lot of uninspiring Prime Ministers Britain has had since Atlee.
Last edited:
I never agreed with that war in Iraq, but when the decisions were made to go ahead with it, you would have been hard pushed to find Tory MP's against it. I am pretty sure as well any other postwar PM / Government after Atlee would have done as Blair''s government did. While I, like many, were against military action then, Saddam was a proven miltary threat to his neighbours (Iran and Kuwait) and his own people, so there were strong arguments for the action taken, stronger than the grounds for many other military action's taken imo. This is why, excepting your personal grief, I find the hatred of Blair remarkable - any likely government then, for about 50 odd years beforehand, and after would do the same. Very unfortunately.
North Korea poses a threat to its own people and its neighbour, South Korea. Why aren't you pushing for military action?
Saudi Arabia, China, Pakistan, Russia and a myriad South American countries pose a threat to their own people, and possibly their neighbours in some cases. Why aren't you pushing for military action?
Why so selective?
Raking over old coals, but weren't you one of those opposed to the action the UK government took to recover the Falklands and liberate the British subjects there?
The MPs believed his lies, yes. Had he told the truth, I'm sure the support would have been severely diluted.
I'm pretty sure that we would have joined the war against Saddam had we had a Tory government at the time (can't remember who their leader was Then) it was about supporting the US which we have done blindly for decades. Last time we didn't as far as I can remember was when Harold Wilson did one of his fudges about Vietnam. Thatcher even supported Reagans invasion of Grenada. Of course it's not reciprocal, the US shafted us over Suez (quite rightly) and were lukewarm at best on the Falklands. Blair is a convenient hate figure for all those angry about the consequences of the war, that's fair enough, but given the Chilcott evidence the army leadership and intelligence services have got off very lightly in the media coverage.
180,000 Labour members paid their £25 to vote in the leadership election, presumably guaranteeing a Corbyn win. Hope the vast majority of Labour MPs who don't want him then do the decent thing and decide to break away on the simple grounds that they are divorced from the views of the membership of their party. Then Corbyn can stand on his own platform rather than this cobbled together mishmash of policies they have at the moment and which he doesn't like. If he is then honest about his support for unfettered immigration he will lose all the angry votes in the north and just have a few inner city London seats after the next election. If the ex Labour MPs form a centre left party with an explicit pro control of immigration policy some of them may save their seats. But come the election in 2020 quite probably a surge for UKIP as our negotiations to leave the EU will only have finished a year before and there will still be a highly visible immigrant presence in the country. Hopefully not enough for them to win votes, but possibly enough to split the opposition votes giving the Tories a much bigger majority. Just playful speculation.
Just heard Diane Abbott on the radio, what a train wreck of a politician. She was blaming Labour MPs for not getting behind Corbyn at PMQs, having somehow forgotten that most of them want him to piss off.
180,000 Labour members paid their £25 to vote in the leadership election, presumably guaranteeing a Corbyn win. Hope the vast majority of Labour MPs who don't want him then do the decent thing and decide to break away on the simple grounds that they are divorced from the views of the membership of their party. Then Corbyn can stand on his own platform rather than this cobbled together mishmash of policies they have at the moment and which he doesn't like. If he is then honest about his support for unfettered immigration he will lose all the angry votes in the north and just have a few inner city London seats after the next election. If the ex Labour MPs form a centre left party with an explicit pro control of immigration policy some of them may save their seats. But come the election in 2020 quite probably a surge for UKIP as our negotiations to leave the EU will only have finished a year before and there will still be a highly visible immigrant presence in the country. Hopefully not enough for them to win votes, but possibly enough to split the opposition votes giving the Tories a much bigger majority. Just playful speculation.
Just heard Diane Abbott on the radio, what a train wreck of a politician. She was blaming Labour MPs for not getting behind Corbyn at PMQs, having somehow forgotten that most of them want him to piss off.
Be great to know what William Hague thinks of the decision of Blair's to go to war. I suspect he's grateful he lost the 2001 election, and don't doubt he'd have also sent us into Iraq. This doesn't excuse Blair of course.
Stan, Thatcher actually "fell out" with Reagan over Grenada, and he didn't tell her until the night before if I recall correctly. His regime change of a state whose head was nominally the Queen, upset Thatcher's sensibilities.
I'd love to know what she'd have done in 2003.
Agree Tootng, Blair lied to MP's which got him the war Bush Wanted. I doubt that many MP's would have voted if they knew the truth. Blair was all false smiles and promises. Go get yourself and family in debt so the Tories will sort it out later. All those crocodile tears and croaky voice didn't fall us at Chilcot inquiry (although he seems have fooled a few). I find it remarkable how people can stand up for him when he has blood on his hands.
She'd certainly have been less willing to jump into bed with Dubya. I suspect the balance of power in the relationship would have been significantly closer to the UK side than the US.
I stand corrected, re Grenada, but don't recall her denouncing the invasion as a gross violation of sovereignty.
How can you possibly say that with such certainty? She has a massive fan club I know but she wasn't infallible. Far from it.
Simple. She didn't get the title of Iron Lady for nothing. I don't ever recall anyone calling Blair 'Iron Tony'...
OK, if the Sun gives someone a nickname that defines their characteristics. I'll bear that in mind for future reference.
If you ignore her clearly displayed character over her time in No 10, then I suppose so.
Be serious here. She was a formidable leader - real leader - who got stuff done her way. Tony Blair was a lying brown-noser who kowtowed to the US throughout his time in office. There's simply no comparison between the two, and there's no way on earth that she would have been steamrollered into a war she did not want to enter, simply because a particularly weak US president said so.