Looks like Chilcot has been less than kind to Tony Blair and Jack Straw, his report due out in July apparently gives both of them a mauling.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/chilcot-report-tony-blair-set-to-be-savaged-in-absolutely-brutal-iraq-war-inquiry-verdict-a7041926.html
I am tempted to vote Labour next time if Corbyn keeps to his word about trying TB for war crimes.
|
If he is promising that he's a bit confused between the Judiciary and the Executive...or maybe he's doffing his hat to his Trotsky heroes. Much as I despise Blair..
|
"I am tempted to vote Labour next time if Corbyn keeps to his word about trying TB for war crimes."
I doubt the man who is the ineffectual leader of the Opposition has any real influence over whether Blair is tried for war crimes, so I wouldn't let this affect your decision about voting for Labour. It's another of Corbyn's plausible-sounding ideas that will come to nothing.
Last edited by: Focal Point on Sun 22 May 16 at 22:38
|
The House of Commons approved the Iraq War. Maybe because Tony Blair lied.
If we are to try every politician who lied, we need to evacuate the Isle of Wight to make a big enough prison for those found guilty .... but then, there is no law saying a politician must tell the truth... or will be jailed if they do not..
As for Corbyn, he is a politician.
|
He's not going down that easily
"Tony Blair: Ground war needed to defeat IS militants"
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36367250
|
>> "Tony Blair: Ground war needed to defeat IS militants"
>>
That is probably very true and almost impossible at the same time - modern western armies would find it very difficult to fight these terrorists as they don't wear uniforms, follow the Geneva Convention, mix with civilians etc. Local civilians could possibly prefer ISIS to a western invasion. It is time Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran put there differences aside and do the job of cleaning up their own back yard. Of course there is the claim that ISIS are Saudi backed so perhaps this could turn in to a regional war!?
|
Even though "we" started it and kept poking the stick in the hornet's nest for over a 100 years
|
It's a pity the politicians didn't get the message the first time we got trounced. Early 1800s?
|
I blame the Babylonians, Medes and Scythians for sacking Nineveh
That's when it all went wrong.
|
The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold,
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
Like the leaves of the forest when Summer is green,
That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when Autumn hath blown,
That host on the morrow lay withered and strown.
For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed;
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!
And there lay the steed with his nostril all wide,
But through it there rolled not the breath of his pride;
And the foam of his gasping lay white on the turf,
And cold as the spray of the rock-beating surf.
And there lay the rider distorted and pale,
With the dew on his brow, and the rust on his mail:
And the tents were all silent, the banners alone,
The lances unlifted, the trumpet unblown.
And the widows of Ashur are loud in their wail,
And the idols are broke in the temple of Baal;
And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword,
Hath melted like snow in the glance of the Lord.
Weapons of mass destruction forecast?
|
I remember the WMD fiasco.
I read the DT detailed analysis of Iraqi weapons capability prior to war. It took two full pages. In essence it said: out of date weapons, no spares, sanctions have worked.
I concluded the WMD story was a fabrication.
Told Mrs Madf who told me I was silly : politicians had access to far better information .. how could I judge? (she apologised later when truth was out)..
Anyone who did any research could see WMD was spherical objects.
|
Blair may refuse to accept Chilcot conclusion:
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/29/tony-blair-hints-he-could-refuse-to-accept-chilcots-iraq-war-verdict
Those subject to criticism by an inquiry of these nature are told, before publication via so called 'Salmon letters'. named after the judge who set up process following allegations of unfairness in (IIRC) the Profumo inquiry. Although he's bound by confidentiality/embargo Blair must know by know what the report will say about him.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 29 May 16 at 12:07
|
>> Although he's bound by confidentiality/embargo Blair must know by
>> know what the report will say about him.
>>
He almost certainly does, and he's starting to prepare a defence of sorts. He can see his already diminished stature in history sinking to a new low.
|
"...Blair must know by
>> know what the report will say about him.
>>
He almost certainly does..."
He claims he hasn't seen it, which is either a lie, or, more likely, an obfuscation, since "not seeing it" is only marginally different on the face of it from "having no idea of what it says."
And he has spoken of his great sense of humility about the decisions that were made, and how "I was trying to deal with this in the aftermath of 9/11 and it was very tough - it was very difficult."
Does he seriously expect us to sympathise?
However, in some ways I feel it doesn't matter very much. Blair has been consigned to history as dishonest about the Iraq war, incompetent about its aftermath, a poodle to the idiot then-president of the USA and who then somehow managed to make himself disgustingly rich by spouting his dubious wisdom.
|
>> Blair may refuse to accept Chilcot conclusion:
>>
What will happen if he accepts the report's conclusion or not?
|
He does not care what anyone or any report says, he is a multi millionaire and he will have police protection for life.
|
That's what I was thinking ON, I can't see whatever the report says it will have any signifcant impact on him. Or anyone else, will anyone really change their mind because of what it will say?
|
>> He does not care what anyone or any report says, he is a multi millionaire
>> and he will have police protection for life.
>>
He does care. He may be rich, but like most people who reach the very top of their field in politics he is an egoist who is very concerned as to how history will view him. No one wants to be remembered as an incompetent leader responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
|
. No one wants to be remembered as an incompetent
>> leader responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
>>
He'll have already convinced himself otherwise.
|
Had the aftermath of the war turned out differently he would of course be seen in a very different light probably as one of the most successful politicians in the past 100 years. History can be very unkind.
|
The war aside he was/is still a fgrfdsreretgregt !!!!
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 30 May 16 at 01:28
|
I was trying my best to be kind about him !
|
'Journalists do not expect to like politicians.' (AC, passim).
One may think Tony Blair is smarmy, insincere etc., but those are just politicians' techniques, entirely necessary to keep the punters quiet.
He's a clever man who has the country's interests at heart as well as his own. Of course to some extent these interests go together anyway.
No politician I can think of can stand real scrutiny from all sides, but being very bright TB comes closer than most (of similar eminence obviously). He's more or less OK in my book.
|
I forgot to add that in Iraq, which he blundered into rather, he was disgracefully let down by the Americans. Not Reagan obviously, but the, you know, real people running the US.
|
"... he was disgracefully let down by the Americans. Not Reagan obviously..."
Reagan? Bush Jnr?
|
You just have to look at vociferous enemies on the far left and far right to realise he was on the right track. Not perfect by any means but intelligent and competent.
|
>> Had the aftermath of the war turned out differently he would of course be seen
>> in a very different light probably as one of the most successful politicians in the past 100 years.
And if I'd won the lottery I'd be a millionaire but i haven't so I aren't.
;-)
|
For once I am in entire agreement with AC.
Blair had the best intentions, even in those areas where he turned out to be wrong. Not that I support his politics.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 29 May 16 at 18:55
|
The problem with Blair is that he got caught out in something that always goes down badly, even though we know many people, and politicians especially, do it.
He thought he could get away with "the end justifies the means". A little fudge with the truth when it came to WMD, a little side-step around the legal aspects and the arrogance of the belief that toppling a nasty dictator in order to bring in western-style democracy was somehow a worthy aim (shared by quite a lot of people at the time, of course) - all in the absence of any long-term strategy for Iraq post-invasion.
Had it all worked according to plan these moral failings might have been overlooked, but the almost total disaster that Iraq quickly became prevented any chance of that, and the enormous fortune Blair amassed since (though clearly his services were in demand somewhere) has stuck in the throat of many people.
I'm afraid I don't believe that "having the best intentions" is good enough. It is the way you put those intentions into practice that counts.
|
Sometimes the end really does justify the means.
TB didn't 'have the best intentions'. But he wasn't especially malevolent either. You have to give people their due.
|
>>You have to give people their due.
If that was the case he would should have been dead years ago IMHO.
|
>> If that was the case he would should have been dead years ago IMHO.
That's a bit on the harsh side Perro. I've never thought of you as a murderous type of person.
It's hard work, representing the voters.
|
Not su he had "moral failings". He made a decision. It didn't work out as planned. It's not the first military debacle and it won't be the last. War and its consequences are inherently unpredictable and beat avoided if at all possible.
|
Blair is probably one of the greatest reasons that people don't trust politicians !
|
I think you have made your position on Blair quite clear. Why the UK Parliament voted for action is difficult to see with hindsight, but as Tory support was overwhelming (6 against to 110 Labour votes against) I suggest it was not the sole responsibility of TB. Suggest wait for the report and his rejoinders, if any. Not that it matters, but I very much doubt the American take on Iraq at the time. They excused the Saudi funders of Al-Quaeda and the 9/11 outcome, due to oil interests, maybe. Domestic diversionary tactic deflecting anger onto Hussain perhaps? As for WMD, they probably reside with the Syrian dictator….
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Sun 29 May 16 at 21:03
|
>> I think you have made your position on Blair quite clear.
I despise him. He lied to the house and lied to the population as he had already promised his buddy Bush that we would go to war. I have nothing but contempt for him.
|
I didn't even know that you knew him.
|
Remind you of anyone? Let the man speak:
tinyurl.com/h6bvlcy
|
Sorry, clearly over my head. I missed the point entirely.
|
I didn't know anything about Jeff Koons until recently. His manic expression when interviewed reminded me straight away of Tony Blair. If you're an admirer of TB, however, you might not agree with the word "manic".
|
>> Balloon Dog (Orange) $58,405,000!!
Yes, another thing in common with Blair - lots of dosh.
|
>> Blair is probably one of the greatest reasons that people don't trust politicians !
>>
He's a lawyer, and to compound the sin he's also married to another lawyer who's probably more ambitious than he is if that is humanly possible.
Lawyers make their living by putting the blame on other people; it should come as no surprise to anyone if nothing tends to stick to them.
|
Blair & Cherie : shades of the Clintons?
|
>> Blair & Cherie : shades of the Clintons?
>>
Someone must want to listen and learn from them, they seem to be rolling in it.
|
>> Blair & Cherie : shades of the Clintons?
>>
>>
Shady.... no doubt about that.
|
Has Tone splashed out on a dress for someone not his wife then, I didn't hear about that LOL
(Actually was there something a few months back about Wendy Deng, Rupie's old flame, or am I mis-remembering?)
|
He is a sharp one mister Blair.Whilst he was PM.He was also a adviser to JP Morgan.
Underestimate he got for that job was about 2.5 million an year on top of his PM Wage.
|
Where did that one come from Dutchie?
If true it should be a scandal!!
|
I think Dutchie may be little confused. Tony Blair became advisor to J P Morgan after he left office. A nice little earner but of course perfectly legal.
next.ft.com/content/be4ed2c4-befa-11dc-8c61-0000779fd2ac
|
Looks like it's finally coming out tomorrow.
|
Sorry about my confusion I got it wrong.
|