The Blair out thread

[Nivek]

Blair isn't a leader. He's a politician who will sacrifice any belief to keep office.

He sees Iraq as a way of generating support in the same way as the Falklands conflict.

The last real leader we had was Thatcher.

[Lancer]

"Leadership comes from the UN"

[MRT144]

when are there going to be elections again in the UK? and i wonder if british troops would withdraw if an antiwar leader was elected

[Seneca]

Given the plummeting in his ratings since the whole thing blew up, and the half-million-strong demo anticipated in London tomorrow, this is one f*cker of a perverse way of going about garnering support.

I don't know what his diplomatic game is - it may yet be that UN opposition makes an Iraq war impossible for the US, and that Blair can take some credit for bringing about such a scenario by guiding Bush down the UN route.

Or it maybe that he wants to remove Saddam for humanitarian reasons, what with him being an evil murderer and torturer and that - I'd be inclined to support him on that, but I haven't really heard much of that side of the argument from No 10.

The worst case scenario is that Blair is actually saying what he thinks, and really believes that a WMD attack from Iraq is imminent. In which case either he has access to deeply worrying intelligence, or more likely he's some sort of mentalist.

Blimey, I never thought I'd find myself hoping a politician was lying..

[Seneca]

Originally posted by MRT144
when are there going to be elections again in the UK? and i wonder if british troops would withdraw if an antiwar leader was elected

2005/6 (maximum term is five years, but governments can hold elections at any time before that - usually averages out at around 4 years)

But I can't imagine British troops mutinying and trying to stay in Iraq if they were ordered home...

Or do you mean would a professed anti-war leader find it politically difficult to order a withdrawal?

[Lancer]

MRT, as an American who knows his history, and has endured a bar brawl in Germany with British troops, I can tell you that getting "British troops" to "withdraw" is no simple matter.

It would be a sad thing if the home front were to be the first to break the British line...

[MRT144]

seneca, i meant the latter, an antiwar leader calling back the troops. how likely is that to happen? and what would the US do in that case?

[HAND]

Blair is not like other Lab. PM's-....Macmillan never let British troops get involved in Vietnam.......Changing times in British politics.

[Seneca]

Assuming the war had finished, and the troops were involved in peace keeping and 'nation-building', I think it would be more budgetary considerations that would influence whether they came home or not.

If the war was still going on in 2005 or 2006 - well, all bets are off. I'd imagine in that scenario that an anti-war party (the Liberal Democrats would be the only ones even slightly poised to take power on that platform, and that not very likely) would have won the election on the strength of a commitment to end the war, and would thus have to act on their main election platform. But this is really fantasy politics now....

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Seneca
Leadership comes from the UN - if they ignore its resolutions they are naughty rebels.

I would like to say something to you people who believe this. The UN does not provide leadership in the world. The UN is weak, as it should be. They do not represent my interests. Nor do they represent the interest of the British people or any other people on earth. The institution was never designed to lead the world. It is a place for problems to be solved and diplomacy to take place nothing more. Because we defy the 'authority' of the UN by not following along with it is total Bull****. If you ever expect the people of the US to accept any kind of leadership from the UN you better pack a lunch, because you are in for a very long wait.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DuncanK
Because we defy the 'authority' of the UN by not following along with it is total Bull****. If you ever expect the people of the US to accept any kind of leadership from the UN you better pack a lunch, because you are in for a very long wait.

And yet some seem to have a problem when European countries express the exact same attitude about the U.S.

[Seneca]

Well, obviously the UN doesn't work too well if it's most powerful members start believing that force and coercion are more important than international co-operation and mutual respect...

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Nivek

The last real leader we had was Thatcher.

Given that over the course of several "Historical Filth" articles I think I've established beyond reasonable doubt that "Leader" is just a euphemism for "Insane and comically perverted sub-human" I have no problem with that statement.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Can we get some consistency here? If Blair really is facing near-universal public opposition to war, but is also a political whore who would do anything to keep power, why hasn't he backed down yet?

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


And yet some seem to have a problem when European countries express the exact same attitude about the U.S.

Not me.