Tony Blair: The Country Needs Me

[NY Yankee]

I'm not defending Saddam, but the Kurds supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. I'm also aware of the Dujail massacre. The fact remains that when Colin Powell addressed the UN, he didn't mention either of these. Instead, he made up some BS lie about Iraq trying to procure weapons of mass destruction from Niger. Even Powell later conceded that it was false intelligence. After the Gulf War (another war fought over oil), Saddam was essentially powerless since UN weapons inspections were occurring on a regular basis. Yet, Bush and Blair still decided to invade Iraq. The irony of the situation is that 15 out of the 19 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia enforces Sharia Law, yet they're considered a US "ally."

Residents of the UK, if the US tries to drag your country into another war, stay out of it. Protest in Piccadilly Circus, shut down the Tube, do anything to prevent America from dragging you into another war based on false pretenses. If my country is foolish enough to invade Iran, stay out of it.

 

[jon0844]

Some people seem to have short memories - he won three General Elections

Perhaps if Cameron loses the next election Blair will replace him as leader of The Conservative Party

That did make me chuckle!

God help us if we let him back into politics here. It will, frankly, prove that we've got no hope of ever electing a decent Government here - and that his many years of dumbing down the public has paid off. That's assuming anyone even bothers to vote, given the ridiculous turn out.

In the local elections today, the ward I live in had just 21% turnout. I'm appalled and embarrassed by this. I'm glad I voted, but wonder what excuse almost 80% of my neighbours had?

Tony Blair was convincing enough in 1997 (not that I voted for him) and, as you say, he managed to win successive elections. Long before David Cameron came onto the scene, Mr Blair was embracing the power of good PR and spin to brainwash the general public.. and boy did he do good, right up to, including and beyond the Iraq war and various scandals.

Still, we've all forgotten about the state of the economy after the last Government and we're seemingly ready to allow Labour back in to restart the spending to solve out economic woes, so why should any of us be surprised?

To be honest, while he could make a few quid here, why can't he go to the US and get into politics there? He loved the US, and not just from supporting Bush - but wanting (and succeeding) in Americanising a lot of things here. He'd have probably made a great US President if he'd been born there.

Residents of the UK, if the US tries to drag your country into another war, stay out of it. Protest in Piccadilly Circus, shut down the Tube, do anything to prevent America from dragging you into another war based on false pretenses. If my country is foolish enough to invade Iran, stay out of it.

I was in New York in February 2003 and got caught up (unintentionally, I might add!) in the anti-war protests in Manhattan. The people of New York were quite clearly angry and most didn't want to send troops to Iraq (well, like the UK, most were already there - so the decision had clearly been made before the approval was given to 'start'). Not that I saw much coverage of this back at the hotel (must stop watching Fox News!).

Before I'd left, Tony Blair had got tanks and soldiers on show in prominent positions around London, including the road entrance to Heathrow Airport, to make us all feel threatened and in some sort of imminent danger. The lies, deception and spin was amazing.

Fortunately, a lot of people (I'd like to say most, but can't be sure of that) saw through it - but both your people and ours were ignored anyway. We had about a million people protest here against going to war, but the Government downplayed it by saying that was a small percentage of the population.

So, because we didn't have 60+ million people protesting, it didn't count? Even if 60 million people had protested, they'd still be ignored as not having understood the real situation and the 'real' dangers.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm not defending Saddam, but the Kurds supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. I'm also aware of the Dujail massacre.

Then how on earth can you say:

Saddam Hussein wasn't the nicest guy in the world

The guy was responsible (directly or otherwise) for the death of two million people! I further find the insinuation that because:

the Kurds supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war

the deployment of chemical weapons against a civilian population was therefore either justified or to be expected (and that's before we move onto the mass executions and death squads) to be utterly incredible if not down right contemptible. Seriously, did read what you wrote because that's what it sounds like you're saying?

As for the rest of you post, fair enough you clearly hold strong views on the matter. I've already made mine clear, the reasons we went to war were wrong, the outcome however was not.

 

[Stephen55a1960]

The Great man wants to make a comeback, and has been giving Ed Millimetre the benefit of his wisdom, then.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...lions-quitting--wants-engage-UK-politics.html


If he's so desperate to make a Comback, couldn't we sell him to one of the countries that he's Liberated? I'm sure they'd be only too glad to show their gratitude.

I couldn't help but laugh when I saw this article!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not once has his name being deliberately misspelt.

You do have to admit that the surname he possesses lent itself to a transfixation of the third and fourth letters and was used to great visual effect by the huge numbers of placards carried by the anti-war protestors that marched through the streets of Britain at that time.

 

[Schnellzug]

I was in New York in February 2003 and got caught up (unintentionally, I might add!) in the anti-war protests in Manhattan. The people of New York were quite clearly angry and most didn't want to send troops to Iraq (well, like the UK, most were already there - so the decision had clearly been made before the approval was given to 'start'). Not that I saw much coverage of this back at the hotel (must stop watching Fox News!).

Before I'd left, Tony Blair had got tanks and soldiers on show in prominent positions around London, including the road entrance to Heathrow Airport, to make us all feel threatened and in some sort of imminent danger. The lies, deception and spin was amazing.

Fortunately, a lot of people (I'd like to say most, but can't be sure of that) saw through it - but both your people and ours were ignored anyway. We had about a million people protest here against going to war, but the Government downplayed it by saying that was a small percentage of the population.

So, because we didn't have 60+ million people protesting, it didn't count? Even if 60 million people had protested, they'd still be ignored as not having understood the real situation and the 'real' dangers.

Exactly. Saddam was an Evil tyrant. So, though, were, and still are, a lot of others all around the world (including not a few who were, and still are, Valued Allies of the West in the Fight Against Terrorism). Since the entire strength of Saddam's Ws of MD were a few rusty chemical rounds which had been dumped for more than a decade, the threat that he conceivably posed to anywhere else was about the same as that from Trinidad and Tobago. Why did Tony Blair not campaign with equal passion to overthrow Mugabe, or the government of Burma, or even Saudi Arabia?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why did Tony Blair not campaign with equal passion to overthrow Mugabe, or the government of Burma, or even Saudi Arabia?

My personal views to the questions you ask above are:-

Mugabe....Fear of being branded a neo-colonialist and how Britain would be seen by the other African nations.

Burma......Past British influence of that country being used in the land war against the Japanese in The Second World War (remember the Chindits) and nothing really of strategic importance for British commercial interests.

Saudi Arabia....This is a "no-brainer" (pardon the Americanism) where, in this country, American interests of all types are paramount. You will note that our American "allies" never at any time, made such a statement against Saudi Arabia.

I note that you did not have North Korea in your list.

 

[Schnellzug]

I note that you did not have North Korea in your list.

Well, of course, they have the Bomb, don't they, so we'd never dare to make threatening noises in that direction ...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well, of course, they have the Bomb, don't they, so we'd never dare to make threatening noises in that direction ...

Exactly. No-one really believes that the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty is anything but an attempt to keep the major powers ability to threaten other smaller powers if they "get out of line".

Remember what was said by one American to Pakistan (prior to them having nuclear weapons) that " we would bomb you back to the Stone Age" if Pakistan were not compliant in accepting the American military plan for Afghanistan in that region.

I always remember the American "spoof" song addressed to the then-ruling party in Afghanistan prior to the American war, to the calypso tune of "Hey Mr.Tally-Man" that had the lines......

Hey Mister Taliban, give us Bin Laden,
Daylight come and we bomb your home

 

[NY Yankee]

Saudi Arabia....This is a "no-brainer" (pardon the Americanism) where, in this country, American interests of all types are paramount. You will note that our American "allies" never at any time, made such a statement against Saudi Arabia.

On behalf of all Americans, I apologise. Saudi Arabia is the most corrupt dictatorship in the world. Women can't even leave the house without a male escort in that country. However, because they produce the most oil in the world, America looks past their atrocities.

 

[43021HST]

Burma......Past British influence of that country being used in the land war against the Japanese in The Second World War (remember the Chindits) and nothing really of strategic importance for British commercial interests.

I've recently been reading John Pilger Hidden agendas, whereupon he goes into a lot of depth about Burma. Please note this book was written around the early 2000s.

The current Burmese government is in fact friendly with the British Government, subsequently, we supply them with weapons to help quell the population. Burma does have Oil deposits on which the locals are forced in slave like conditions to toil on. The Oil companies in Burma are mostly American.

Hence why we wont touch the Burma.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I've recently been reading John Pilger Hidden agendas, whereupon he goes into a lot of depth about Burma. Please note this book was written around the early 2000s. ....Hence why we wont touch the Burma.

I think that you will find that matters in Burma in 2012 are not the same as in the time when your book was written.

 

[43021HST]

I think that you will find that matters in Burma in 2012 are not the same as in the time when your book was written.

I have been trying to look up the state of Burma, today but there doesn't seem to be anything quite as comprehensive as John Pilger, all I know is the SLORC is still around, under a different alias.

To be honest I cant imagine that, that much has changed, I can imagine that western companies are still making the most of the crap workers conditions.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I have been trying to look up the state of Burma, today but there doesn't seem to be anything quite as comprehensive as John Pilger, all I know is the SLORC is still around, under a different alias.

It was only researching deeper into this thread that I learned that over 90% of the would trade in rubies comes from that country.

Incidentally...what is the correct phoenetic intonation to use when saying the new name of that country....MYANMAR ?

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Some people seem to have short memories - he won three General Elections

Politicians don't win elections, the opposition loses them.
Perhaps if Cameron loses the next election Blair will replace him as leader of The Conservative Party

............................
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Pardon? Not the nicest guy in the world? A slight understatement there don't you think?

When he took power he had 22 members of the Ba'ath Party executed (by the former party members) along with hundreds more members of his own party over the years that followed.

Then there was the Al-Anfal Campaign. This was the genocide of the Kurdish people in Iraq, which included a chemical weapons attack on the town of Halabja in 1988. Here the Iraqi Air Force deployed a combination of Mustard Gas (the same weapon used in WW1) as well as Nerve Agents like Sarin and VX. Somewhere between 3,200 and 5,000 were killed along with around 10,000 injured in the attack. As for the Kurdish population at large the Al-Anfal Campaign killed an estimated 182,000 civilians (though they range all the way up to 300,000).

There is also the Dujail massacre (the event that he was hanged for). A failed assassination attempt led to the deaths of 148 people and many more were probably beaten and tortured.

The Iran-Iraq war which ran between 1980 and 1988. Here again chemical weapons were used against Iranian soldiers (the effects of which are still being felt, no doubt, by the survivors). Whilst the conflict at large led to the deaths of in excess of a million Iraqi and Iranian soldiers (and set both nations economic and social development back by a decade or more).

There are various estimates for how many people Saddam's regime killed. The New York Times obituary estimated it at one million (excluding the Iran-Iraq war) and there are other estimates that whilst slightly lower are still in excess of 500,000 deaths (again excluding the million killed in the Iran-Iraq war).

So yeah not the nicest guy in the world.

To be honest, whatever the reasons for invading Iraq in 2003, I don't think that it was a bad thing that man such as Saddam Hussein was removed from power (though I'd have rather seen him tried by the International Criminal Court). Indeed to my mind the biggest failing of all wasn't going to war on faulty information and more that we didn't have a workable plan for the aftermath of removing the existing government (and indeed removing the entire machinery of government as well).

But none of that affected this country. Once again following the U.S.'s lead we wanted to play at being the world's policeman and are still suffering the consequences to-day. Bliar a middle east peace envoy? Bloody good job he's doing in Syria at the moment. Nasty nasty piece of two faced hypocritical work.

 

[ACE1888]

Not politically 'motivated' at all, but think of Blair, and 'spin', along with all the other b*llocks, and basically they're all LIARS :roll: And then you realise there are far more important things in life... like a day out 'on the trains'

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Bliar a middle east peace envoy? Bloody good job he's doing in Syria at the moment. Nasty nasty piece of two faced hypocritical work.

The trouble is that I honestly believe that Tony Blair still sees and believes in himself as a World Statesman who has been harshly and unjustly portrayed in Britain.

This country has had enough years of seeing "Mr Nice Guy with a ready smile" turn into "Vice-President Blair".

Was it not said that Tony Blair in a cabinet meeting was asking how he should begin a difficult speech to address the British people over a matter of the war in Iraq and a "wag" there present made the comment...How about..."My fellow Americans"...

 

[Schnellzug]

The trouble is that I honestly believe that Tony Blair still sees and believes in himself as a World Statesman who has been harshly and unjustly portrayed in Britain.

This country has had enough years of seeing "Mr Nice Guy with a ready smile" turn into "Vice-President Blair".

Was it not said that Tony Blair in a cabinet meeting was asking how he should begin a difficult speech to address the British people over a matter of the war in Iraq and a "wag" there present made the comment...How about..."My fellow Americans"...

I've seriously no doubt at all that he is delusional. I think he really does see himself as the reincarnation of Mrs T and Winnie, plus perhaps, as suggested earlier, Napoleon, or at least the Duke of Wellington.

 

[The Barlow Boy]

The trouble is that I honestly believe that Tony Blair still sees and believes in himself as a World Statesman who has been harshly and unjustly portrayed in Britain.

And I honestly believe that you're absolutely correct.
This country has had enough years of seeing "Mr Nice Guy with a ready smile" turn into "Vice-President Blair".

Was it not said that Tony Blair in a cabinet meeting was asking how he should begin a difficult speech to address the British people over a matter of the war in Iraq and a "wag" there present made the comment...How about..."My fellow Americans"...

..........................

 

[jon0844]

People kept saying he wanted the big presidency job for the EU, and he must have been gutted when he didn't get it!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You have to go back to the days of St Thomas More to find the previous English incumbent of the title of "A man for all seasons".

 

[SS4]

But none of that affected this country. Once again following the U.S.'s lead we wanted to play at being the world's policeman and are still suffering the consequences to-day. Bliar a middle east peace envoy? Bloody good job he's doing in Syria at the moment. Nasty nasty piece of two faced hypocritical work.

I don't know why there is a peace envoy in the Middle East, the whole region is unstable because "my God is the one true god and I've been told to kill anyone who disagrees" :roll:

I'd be careful with Syria, there is no way that we're being given the full story. Like coverage of Libya or the Arab Spring it's crude propaganda designed to render complex issues into "herp derp he's bad" with neither evidence nor justification.

edit: that's not to say they weren't bad of course.