Toothless Poodle

[BEagle]

Rising to the idiotic and inflammatory remarks made by that Iranian about Israel, our Glorious Leader Trust-me-Tone is reported to have said :

"When are you going to do something about this? Because you imagine a state like that, with an attitude like that, having a nuclear weapon."

Err, precisely how, you complete and utter ar$e, would you attempt to "do something"?

Presumably you realise that your Bush bum-licking adventurism has hardly gone down well with the public - and your military forces are already overstretched and facing further cuts as it is. So you can rule the military option out - you simply haven't got any soldiers left in your toy box.

If you want to play the big boy, you lightweight, you need to have something strong with which to back up your statements. The UK no longer has - and you are simply a toothless poodle.

[DuaneDibley]

I don't think you like him........

[A390]

Just how many Black Omegas do you think the 'Dog Kennel' has available?

[A2QFI]

I think that Bliar will probably invade, same as he did in Iraq and with equally predictable consequences. The scenario is fairly similar, Muslim country with supplies of oil (and gas?), threatening others and may have nasty weapons and nuclear ambitions. Time for a change at the top of the regime thinks Poodle Boy!

[airborne_artist]

So you can rule the military option out - you simply haven't got any soldiers left in your toy box.

Leaving aside my similar dislike of Trust-me, let's be realistic and recognise that GW isn't going to invade Iran either. US voters have also had enough with the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The 2000th US soldier died there this week.

If anything, Iran has for some time has been a greater threat to regional stability than Iraq. Interestingly its oil reserves are about 20% less than Iraq ......

[speeddial]

If you wanted to invade Iran by land you'd need have good relations with neighbouring countries first, I suppose occupying them counts.

[ORAC]

I think Beagle should get off the fence and tell us what he really thinks........

[Dan Winterland]

It takes 2 hours to fly across Iran in a 747 and it's 90% mountains. Invade?

And while the US and UK are rattling sabres towards Iran, they will continue to supply the insurgents in Iraq to ensure that GWB and Tone are well and truly kept busy elsewhere.

[ORAC]

So, it´ll have to be the "Operation Glass Lake" option then? :ooh:

[The Gorilla]

The Israelis can take care of themselves, the only problem they have is the means of delivery.

I wont be losing any sleep over it..

[southside]

The last thing we need is a scuffle with Iran. We'd get our ar$e's spanked. Best to leave well alone and pursue smaller, less capable countries.

[DuaneDibley]

Gorilla,

Surely that's the scary part though?

[Wyler]

BEagle

Word perfect!

[maxburner]

Beags,

Just out of interest, have you ever tried writing to Tone? I did, with a slightly less abrasive tone than you have taken in your post, and I wondered what sort of repsonse you received.

MB

By the way, I tend to agree with the essence of your note. However, I cannot see the US or the UK public putting up with another mis-managed military adventure, so I think Iran is safe for a while.

[Bluntend]

I cannot see the US or the UK public putting up with another mis-managed military adventure

UK and US public wern't exactly in favour of the last Bush/Blair venture... Millions marched on London and Washington in protest and yet we still went to war.

[brakedwell]

Send bully boy Prescott, he can sort them out!

[whowhenwhy]

One thing has just occurred to me, while I realize that a repeat of the Osirak reactor mission is a non-starter, I'm sure that if the Israeli's were that concerned with Iran's threats that they would have taken suitable action already. The Mossad have almost certainly got much better 'connections' in Tehran than any of our 'intelligence' agencies

[air pig]

The Israelis already have a triad of response to threats including a sea lauched capability.

The Israelis will not allow history to repeat itself, and have proved this in the past if they feel threatened, to wit 1967 Six day War, Osirak raid and probably countless other unreported activities.

BEagle is right we have not the public support for this sort of dangerous adventurism and cannot take part in any case as we now lack the capability in the terms of men and resourses. Further BEagle you cast a very nasty sleight on poodles, who are at least ameanable to training in being able to keep their mouths shut and stop yapping at the wrong time.

After trust me Tone's word watch recruiting to the Forces fall even further and the PVR rate rise to unsustainable levels.

[The Gorilla]

Don't delude yourselves for one minute, if Tony shouted jump your ever loyal masters would ask how high? And those of you who are left would have to pay the price. Sad but true.

[DEL Mode]

I'm not sure if it's a game of join the dots, or the Crusades.

Hitler came to power on the back of social reform, then started to expand his influence.

Only difference is that he spent lots of money on expanding the forces before he sent them to war.

I think it's time somebody took the Iraq war to court, at least that might put him back in his box.

[An Teallach]

One can dream ...

A Dead Statesman

I could not dig: I dared not rob:
Therefore I lied to please the mob.
Now all my lies are proved untrue
And I must face the men I slew.
What tale shall serve me here among
Mine angry and defrauded young?

Kipling: EPITAPHS 1914

Perhaps Kipling had a bit of the Nostradamus about him?

[Lyneham Lad]

I think it's time somebody took the Iraq war to court, at least that might put him back in his box.

If only...........

It never fails to amaze me that the people of this country are so supine that there is no real opposition to the continuing lies and misrepresentation regarding Iraq.

It surely must be a yet another indicator of meglomania in Trust-Me-Tone that he can even think about spouting of action against Iran.

I don't recall seeing similar calls for action from France and Germany...........

[16 blades]

....probably because they have billions tied up in dodgy deals with Iran (as with Iraq).

16B

[ZK-NSJ]

lets be thankfull that bush has only another 3yrs in office, once him and his cronies are gone the world will be a safer place,

[Onan the Clumsy]

It's ok, you don't have to worry about Iran. They're always too busy fighting Iraq to have any time for other skirmishes...






I'm glad I don't live in a country called Iraa or Irab or Irac or Irad or Irae or Iraf or Irag or :zzz:

[DEL Mode]

ZK-NSJ

Trouble is, the mouth piece may go but the cronies will still be there.

And you cant rule out the people that voted him in power.

I'd rather be sat where you are, cause Helen is not going to lead you guys into Iran.

[ANW]

Can't really see what all the fuss is about. Anyone who has flown EMIRATES will have noted from the in-flight moving map that Israel doesn't exist. Other arab airlines operate similar in-flight systems and I would guess that Iranian carriers also show a similar view. So the map has already been wiped a long time ago.

[Zoom]

Should we or the USA be daft enough to invade Iran and lucky enough to win, just think of the policing problem afterwards. It's bad enough in Iraq but Iran is 6 times the size of the UK, 4 times the size of Iraq and, for our American readers, slightly larger than Alaska.

[JessTheDog]

Bliar is a certifiable lunatic. Thankfully, UK involvement in any Iranian undertaking is impossible due to military cutbacks. If military action was intended, there would be civil disobedience on a scale never seen before in this country and quite a few troops would hand in their kit.

[Maude Charlee]

Bliar doesn't have the balls to take on Iran no matter what guff comes out of his mouth.

Unlike Iraq, Iran hasn't been subject to a virtual anihilation of its armed forces and defenses, numerous years of monitoring and sanctions. It also does have a WMD programme, probably does have the capacity to produce and deploy said WMDs, and it's leaders are crazy religious extremists. Saddam was merely a legendary world-class bull****ter, which Bush and Bliar unwisely chose to use as an excuse to try and score some political goody points with their respective voters prior to re-election.

If Bliar tries this one on for size, it really will blow up in his hateful little face like a dodgy bonfire night firework.

[The Gorilla]

I don't know why everyone is getting so steamed up. Iran could only ever wipe Israel off the map by using nuclear weapons, weapons that they are some time away from manufacturing. Israel can take care of itself on that level and even if Iran gets lucky what do you think the USA's reaction would be? My only minor concern is the fallout, which will mostly fall on a lot of countries that quite frankly deserve it!!

:=

[highcirrus]

BEagle I feel sure that you take the Spectator but if you don’t, you may be interested in this article from the latest issue, which seems not to cast your friend “Tone” in a particularly good light.

Labour has left a scar on the soul of Britain

Simon Heffer

Perhaps you will forgive a moment of nostalgia. Let us reflect upon what life was like exactly 10 years ago, when I last had the honour to write a political column for The Telegraph. John Major was prime minister, but apart from that things have got worse.

We were still truly a United Kingdom, as the devolved assemblies in Edinburgh and Cardiff had not yet been invented. Hereditary peers still sat as of right in a House of Lords that was a proper revising chamber, held the Government routinely to account and defeated it with alarming regularity. The Upper House was not yet full of personal friends of the Prime Minister, or of donors to his party. The House of Commons, too, had yet to adopt that posture of slavishness and ineffectuality that now characterises it. It was not yet treated with contempt by the executive.

We had a strong and powerful opposition that made the Government's life almost impossible at times, and which itself had a coherence of view and a strength of discipline that would soon bring it triumphantly to power. Perhaps best of all, we still had a strong and independent Civil Service that functioned in the highest standards of disinterestedness and whose most senior members did not have to take orders from political appointees. Oh, and it was still legal for people to hunt vermin with dogs.

These constitutional changes have helped create an authoritarian government whose wishes are largely rubber-stamped by Parliament. So grand has the executive become that the Prime Minister's wife now regards herself as the "First Lady" - a notion the Queen must find interesting - and her husband acts increasingly as though he were a head of state, not of government. It is no wonder, given this arrogant freedom from the old checks and balances of our system of governance, that the Labour Party that has ruled us since 1997 now feels it can, and should, play a so much greater part in the lives of the people than even it would have imagined before its election.


Full Article (http://www.spectator.co.uk/online_article.php?id=69)

[BEagle]

highcirrus - no, I don't take the Spectator - thanks for the link.

It gives a good reminder of how the UK has deteriorated under Trust-me-Tone and his cronies.

Conspiracy theorists elsewhere believe that Blair's rise to power was orchestrated by the shadowy Bildeberg group. Frightening if true...

Everwhere you go, you see the mark of the beast which is Noo Labor. Whether it's state nannying characterised by the proliferation of CCTV surveillance and roadside speed cameras, 'yellow jacket' Health and Safety mentality - or more serious matters such as the failed NHS, failed public transport system, form-filling administrators strangling the police.....

I'm struggling to think of one single thing which Bliar and his gang have achieved which has improved my quality of life in the past 10 years. But I can think of several ways in which he's lessened it.

I am fortunate enough to live in the next PM's constituency. A very nice bloke with a genuine passion to sort things out when he's elected at the next election.

How long do we have to wait?

[The Gorilla]

Beagle


About eight years because I can't see any one overcoming a majority of over 60 seats!! Unless the lights go out this winter..

[RubiC Cube]

Ah Beagle,

Surely your life has been improved by your deciding to pull the yellow and black early because of your loathing of working for Tone?

[An Teallach]

Beags

I am fortunate enough to live in the next PM's constituency
Which one? Hopefully not the vacuous Bliar clone that appears to be the front runner at the moment. The prehensile party careeering to self-destruct appears to me to be about to desperately grasp at a version of Bliar at the time when even the most obtuse voter in the country has realised that electing someone who wants power without principle was a mistake.

I blame the douce voters of Fairmilehead. If they hadn't elected Morticia Adams (http://www.oag.gov.uk/), Rifkind may have kept the profile to have made a better stab at the leadership.

PS

From Morticia's biog page:

In 2005, she was elected to the House of Lords.

Elected? By whom? No wonder we're up the creek when God's own country's chief law officer has delusions of being representative and doesn't understand the constitution that gave her the bauble.

Ye see yon birkie ca'd 'a lord,' Wha struts, an' stares, an' a' that? Tho' hundreds worship at his word, He's but a cuif for a' that.

Indeed. I suppose it's marginally better than her dypsomaniac arsonist colleague from the NuLabour peerage now enjoying the hospitality of Saughton Hotel. :mad:

[Lyneham Lad]

Beagle, old chap,
Conspiracy theorists elsewhere believe that Blair's rise to power was orchestrated by the shadowy Bildeberg group. Frightening if true...

Presumably you meant the Bilderberg group. A quick search on Google results in lots of links to conspiracy-theory sites. Interesting to note that Dennis Healey was the UK's rep in the early days and currently the position seems to rest with three-time loser Ken Clarke.

If one subscribes to statements such as "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" - (Edmund Burke), then one might plough through some of the articles and ponder on their veracity. But there again, even on a wet & windy Sunday morning, there are better things to do (really must mend that fence-panel). :hmm:

[BEagle]

Yes, I meant Bilderberg - spielng erorr! :eek:

Which constituency? Certainly not a NooLabor one!

As for the idea of grumpy Gordon running things when the poodle finally goes.....:uhoh:

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Unless the lights go out this winter..

Strait of Hormuz, continued spat with Iran (see also the thread on Jetblast), Iranian attempt at closing the strait (with aircraft, air launched missiles, surface warships, submarines, mines, land based missiles, asymetric means), lack of numbers of ships/aircraft to protect our shipping...

Oil shortage/crisis on the horizon?

[The Gorilla]

Yes but that's not of interest to anyone here in UK PLC.

[jstars2]

Before his recent spectacular gunshot suicide in February 2005, iconic American writer and novelist Hunter S. Thompson (best known for his Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas) had this to say about a couple of our favourite people:

- "I never thought that I would ever see a president worse than Richard Nixon, but George W. Bush is the worst president in American history, because he is the dumbest, and because he has destroyed in four years what it took two centuries to build up. He has taken this country from a prosperous nation at peace to a dead-broke nation at war. We are losing this stupid, fraudulent war in Iraq and every nation in the world despises us, except for a handful of corrupt Brits, like that simpering little whore Tony Blair."

I understand that the epithet directed towards our “Tone” related, amongst many other things, to his breathtakingly quick switch from being “Slick Willie” Clinton’s bestest buddy to that of ideologically opposite George “Dubya” Bush’s soul mate and prayer partner.

[Anotherpost75]

Is this the guy you mean?

http://www.londonist.com/attachments/sizemore/i_love_big_guns.jpg

[Wyler]

Lets make all Civil Servants eligible for Military Service in times of crisis. Then stand back and watch Government policy go into rapid reverse.

[Maple 01]

Oi, I've just become a Sivil Serpant - I did 22 years in the mob - you sir, can get stuffed - I'm not doing any more!;)

PS The more TB riles BEags the more I think he's doing something right

[BEagle]

A mere 22 years?

'Simpering little whore'. Has a certain ring to it, that does!

[Maple 01]

Whose ring?

Think on BEags - four more years!

I ask the members of the jury, is THIS the real BEagle?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/fastshow/characters/rowley_birkin.shtml

[BEagle]

maple 01, you can take the pi$$ out of me as much as you want, I really don't care. Behave like a troll if you wish - it's entirely your choice.

But I do care about the wholly unrealistic mutterings made by a so-called leader who obviously does not understand the need for available assets to match - or preferably exceed - the requirements he intends to place upon them.

[Maple 01]

BEags, and I thought you could handle ‘banter’! Remember, not everyone that disagrees with your world view or considers your 'Grumpy old man' on-line persona worthy of gentle lampooning is necessarily a troll - though I obviously have offended which was not my intention – but an inability to stand-back and laugh at yourself? How far would that have got you in the crewroom?

Your every utterance on this forum of late amply illustrates your political persuasion and disgust, to the point that you come across as being so blinded by hate of Labour that you refuse to consider that on occasion you may be wrong. This is fine up to a point but after a while it becomes a little tiresome IMO.

There aren’t the resources to do everything, and I don’t remember HM opposition spending lavishly while they were running the show. Remember John Nott - remember the Falklands debacle? Frontline First? Options for Change? Cold War dividend? Every shade of politician has expected the Armed Forces to do more with less and been bloody ungrateful for our efforts – you’d do well to remember that New Labour was not set up just to annoy you, they are just following in the grand traditions of previous administrations by spending money on populist causes - and that ain't us

[WE Branch Fanatic]

BEagle said...

I'm struggling to think of one single thing which Bliar and his gang have achieved which has improved my quality of life in the past 10 years. But I can think of several ways in which he's lessened it.

Have to say I feel the same.

Maple what is your response? what good things has Tony done for you?

[Maple 01]

I'm better off (pay making a stab at keeping pace with inflation)
Low mortgage rates (Paid 15% under you-know-who)
Stable economy (end of Tory 'boom and bust')
Better educated (education grants)
Have the option to go back to do a MA (ELC)
I can afford to send my daughter to nursery school (Nursery grant)
Improved NHS funding - means I don't wait quite so long for appointments and the old Nissen Huts have been replaced by a new hospital

My mother (83) gets
Winter Fuel allowance
Increased attendance allowance
Guaranteed income

That's just a few off the top of my head



'Yes, I'll grant you, education, welfare and financial stability, but apart from that, what have they done for us?'

[16 blades]

I'm better off (pay making a stab at keeping pace with inflation)
And you'd be even better off without massive Labour tax rises.
Low mortgage rates (Paid 15% under you-know-who)
Interest rates are nothing to do with the govt - they are set by the Bank of England. The 15% was necessary at the time to bring inflation under control - this govt simply fiddles the figures when it sees something it doesn't like.
Stable economy (end of Tory 'boom and bust')
...built on the stable economic conditions inherited as a DIRECT RESULT of Tory policy...now built almost solely on vast sums of borrowed money and released equity. Labour has presided over an explosion in personal debt - the 'bust' that will follow this boom will make black wednesday look like a walk in the park.
Better educated (education grants)
Pity the same cannot be said for the rest of the country, or the poor sods who will build up massive debts in future in order to be 'educated'. This govt has utterly destroyed any pretence of standards in education in the name of 'equality'
Have the option to go back to do a MA (ELC)
...which will now cost a bloody fortune because of top-up fees, that is if you are not deemed to 'middle class' or intelligent by the admissions stasi to be allowed to study in the first place.
I can afford to send my daughter to nursery school (Nursery grant)
...so the govt can start indoctrinating them early, instead of being at home bonding with their parents being taught what YOU want to teach them - the last thing this social-engineering junta wants.
Improved NHS funding - means I don't wait quite so long for appointments and the old Nissen Huts have been replaced by a new hospital
Shame all this improved funding hasn't actually produced any meaninful improved results, being used instead to hire armies of beaurocrats and 'five-a-day co-ordinators', and 'new' hospitals are just as filthy as the old ones - believe me. Oh yes, and they're built on borrowed money as well.
My mother (83) gets
Winter Fuel allowance
Increased attendance allowance
Guaranteed income
Pity about the MASSIVE increases in council tax she and others like her now have to pay thanks to this thieving, meddling, wealth-distributing, union-baron driven excuse for a govt. You cannot seriously tell me she is better off because of them?

Get real, Maple!

16B

[BEagle]

You beat me to it, 16B - I was going to reply in the same vein last night, but ran out of enthusiasm!

But very well put.

'Better educated' indeed. The dumbing down of secondary education in worthwhile subjects and the increase in tertiary education to provide 'equality of oportunity' has led to a credit card debt culture amongst students whilst they take their 'media studies' or 'Klingon' Mickey Mouse degrees at some Brave Noo University which some years ago was a basic Polytechnic.

[Maple 01]

Well, what can I say? Some folk just refuse to see any good. Still, several inaccuracies in your response 16 Blades, won't bore the other forum members with going through the list but just to cover three

I mentioned Nursery school allowance

...so the govt can start indoctrinating them early, instead of being at home bonding with their parents being taught what YOU want to teach them - the last thing this social-engineering junta wants.

Emmmm, it's attached to an independent grammar school - shouldn’t get too much political indoctrination there! And I'd check-fire on the other stuff unless you actually know me!

Stable economy

...built on the stable economic conditions inherited as a DIRECT RESULT of Tory policy...now built almost solely on vast sums of borrowed money and released equity. Labour has presided over an explosion in personal debt - the 'bust' that will follow this boom will make black Wednesday look like a walk in the park.

The old 'if it's good, thank the Tories, if its bad blame Labour defence. Personal debt has expanded over the first world under administrations of both the left and right

Low mortgage rates

...Interest rates are nothing to do with the govt ...

They were at the time when the Conservatives gave us 15% rates trying to hang in to the ERM, Labour took the view that interest rates shouldn't be used as part of political armoury - oh look, another benefit!

[uknasa]

"Interest rates are nothing to do with the govt - they are set by the Bank of England. The 15% was necessary at the time to bring inflation under control - this govt simply fiddles the figures when it sees something it doesn't like."

Mmmmm 16B and which Govt was it that enabled the BoE to have such autonomy?

[Bluntend]

Right. Since my Granny popped her clogs a few years back and since I don't have any kids (as far as this forum is concerned) I don't really care that much about winter fuel allowances or Nursery School grants.
What I do care about is the irreparable damage this current government has done to our Armed Forces and their reputation world wide. Agressive civilainisation, 'Lean' and other similar methodologies have stripped our capability to operate with any kind of credible war fighting ability let alone respond to any domestic emergency - e.g. Fire Brigade Strike, Foot and Mouth outbreak, terrorist attack?. Our troops at home are under such pressure to deliver that Flight Safety is being stretched to near breaking point and our troops overseas lack the top-level support to the point that some find themselves stranded in theatre without the basic equipment they need to do their job safely or the logistic capability to bring them home. 'Morale' and 'Flexibility' are virtual swearwords these days and since the recent round of redundancies specifically targetted the expensive, yet highly experienced elements of our technical trades, a huge hole in technical expertise has opened up - short term financial gain overruling common sense (yet again). Many who applied for but didn't get redundancy are now jumping ship, exacerbating the situation further. Very soon we may well find ourselves in a situation where we can't even support our current commitments let alone take on more.

Quite frankly, the sooner Bliar realises that we are no longer a player on the World stage, rather a weakened and demoralised understudy to the US the better. Irrespective of this government's perfomance on the domestic front, their treatment of the UK Armed Forces is nothing short of criminal.

[Maple 01]

Bluntend, I was asked what improvements I had seen under Labour, I listed a few, now either acknowledge that there have been some in the socioeconomic sphere or join those that refuse to see reality - even I can see that Maggie did some good.......the problem is 'guns or butter?' What are most people in the mil going to want v what are the punters after.

Quite frankly, the sooner Bliar realises that we are no longer a player on the World stage, rather a weakened and demoralised understudy to the US the better. Irrespective of this government's performance on the domestic front, their treatment of the UK Armed Forces is nothing short of criminal.

Quite frankly that re-alignment has been due since 1945 and governments ranging across the political spectrum down the years from Attlee,Churchill, Thacher and Blair (to name a few) have all failed to grasp the nettle – you’d have thought Suez might have been a hint -that the UK is at best a second-level power.

The politicians have also ducked the major question - do we want to play 'world power?' In which case it has to be properly paid for, or do we retreat to the shores of Albion? If option 'B' cut all the projects you like, pull out of NATO, the EU defence force and all other agreements that drag us off to various locations and slash the strength of the services, but don't ever expect to have an Armed Force that can do much more than provide aid to the civilian powers in times of emergency. One thing or the other, can’t do both. But then again, both the Conservatives and Labour have tried ‘Power projection on a shoestring’; don’t say it’s exclusive to Mr Blair

[Bluntend]

Since when has making the same mistakes as previous governments ever been a valid excuse? Just because previous governments (Conservative and Labour) have been found guilty of abusing their armed forces that doesn't give Blair and Co the right to do it now. Surely we should expect our government to learn from past mistakes.

[jindabyne]

Bluntend

Agree. IMHO, the best that can be said of Blair wrt our Armed Forces is that he and his Government colleagues are heavily tarred with the same brush that painted the Thatcher and Major defence ministries. Contemptible!

[Maple 01]

The gist of the argument here is that Blair is sinful and wicked hell bent on destroying the country – I remember people saying the same thing about Maggie - I say those holding those extremist points of view are almost hysterical in their ranting, have very short memories of previous government’s actions and are selective in their criticism. Throw into the mix a bit of xenophobia, a virulent anti-American stance that in previous decades was the exclusive preserve of the rabid left, and an unwillingness to give credit where it's due in any governmental field - That's fine if you want to be part of The Monday club or sit on the 1922 committee

So are you saying that mistakes have been made in the past?- and if so you accept that the right has as frequently cocked-up the military/Aviation industry as the left? Or has it been Blair’s fault that “Options for Change”, “Frontline First”, “The Nott Cuts”, The Peace Dividend, 1957 Defence White Paper et-all started the rot? SDI and the review didn't help I'll grant you

If you want to claim that the foundation of the secure economy was laid-down by the Tories (hmmm yeah…15% mortgage, peak inflation 10%, 3 billion pounds thrown away on one day alone trying to play the market…..) You have to accept that the rotten state of defence was also built on their foundations...unless you can think of someone else to blame?

[Data-Lynx]

So what does MOD say for itself? Is the MOD Annual Report & Accounts 2004-05 (http://www.mod.uk/publications/modara04-05/), published on Friday, a spin on the perceived "rotten state of defence" or is it another worthless report from a Government colleague heavily tarred with the same brush? Admittedly the report stops in Apr 05 but much of it provides a tote of what was been achieved and what happens when statistics lean heavily on "can do". You could cherrypick such things as the proportion of trained staff deployed or PVR figures in the Resources (http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/dra2004_2005/modara_04_05_s1_resources.pdf) section. Try marvelling at the interpretation of statistics in the Future Operations (http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/publications/dra2004_2005/modara_04_05_s1_purpose.pdf) section before the headache sets in. The factoid that caught my eye was the differences in:• Despite the continuing pressure of operations the proportion of Force Elements with no critical weaknesses reported by their military commanders increased from 93% in the last quarter of 2003-04 to 100% in the last quarter of 2004-05;
• The proportion of Force Elements with no critical or serious weaknesses reported by their military commanders remained broadly stable, averaging 68% over the year.So where is the backbone to many of our contentions that all is not well?

[Bluntend]

I'm not trying to say that Tories are good, Labour is bad. What I am trying to say is that right here, right now, things aren't good! The original thread was about our current military ability and our PM's determination to 'do something' about Iran and not about the state of our economy. If you listen to the people at the coal face who are actually trying to do the work, we simply can not do any more than we are doing at the moment. The level of support from our politaical lords and masters is woefully inadequate, the cut backs unsustainable and the amount of red tape put in place by this current government is suffocating.

On another note, if you want to talk about hysteria, maybe Sgt Steve Roberts' widow might have something to say on that given that the body armour issued to her husband was withdrawn shortly before he was shot dead. Or maybe you'd like to discuss the armoured land rovers denied our troops? Or the essential equipment that continues to slip to the right causing us to operate outdated and aging equipment way past its sell by date? Hysteria? Xenophobia? Anti-American? No, simply Pro the poor sods out there doing us proud with zero support from Downing Street.

[Maple 01]

Bluntend, you might not be playing the left/right game, but BEags, who started the topic off, has. Of late been ramping up the anti-Labour rhetoric, and he was the person whose views I was questioning. So far he (and his supporters) have refused even to accept that there has been any improvement in socio-economic conditions in the country since 1997 – strange that, if life under the Conservatives was so wonderful why did they lose the past three elections?

I remember during Kosovo Republican politicians protesting against the action on the grounds that Bill Clinton was running the show - partisanship at its worse, I later watched the Democrats doing the exact same over GW2 - I think many of the anti-Blairites are doing exactly the same thing

As to the second part of your comment all that you say is true and unacceptable, but it has always been thus - half arsed deployments and kit shortages are nothing new - I'm not saying its right, I'm just saying its not unique to the MoD under Labour

[Unmissable]

Although I thoroughly enjoy the anti Bush threads and Tory vs NOO Labour, lets get back to the original theme...is Blair right to be posturing against Iran?

Well I wish he had skipped Iraq first. Iraq was / is a waste of time and we are paying the price, whereas Iran is truly a threat to world security. Just because a war will not physically touch our shores does not mean that it won't touch our lives if we do nothing about it.

So what should we do??

Well we could park a couple of our ageing submarines equipped with ageing (but still highly effective) nuclear weapons offshore.

Hmmmm well that proves the need for a nuclear deterrent at the same time as playing our part in world peace.

Funny how the debate of whether or not to replace our nuclear deterrent is sparking at the moment!

Am I the only one who can spot a connection between Tone's rhetoric and a forthcoming debate (which he will find hard to win when the deterrent has had nothing to deter for 15 years).

IMHO this is all to do with sowing the seeds for a renewal of the Nuclear Deterrent.

While I’m on the subject (and because I am an infrequent poster) my opinion is that for UK to remain an influential nation, we must keep a seat on the BIG tables (Security council etc etc); and the only way we can do this is through specialist (niche) capabilities ie being a nuclear power, which is generally accepted to have a bit more intellectual capability than our (nearly) common language playmates.

UNM

[buoy15]

Unmissable

Haven't you missed something?

What about Canada, Australia, Germany, etc - aren't they influential on the Big Tables without special toys?

[Data-Lynx]

buoy15

Perhaps Canada, Australia and Germany have a more pragmatic view on what they intend to do and how far from their own shore their elected leaders expect to project power.

[BATS]

Canada, Australia and Germany don't have permanent seats on the UN Security Council....... UK does and for that alone, I suspect the deterrent will be replaced !

[pr00ne]

Bluntend,

“On another note, if you want to talk about hysteria, maybe Sgt Steve Roberts' widow might have something to say on that given that the body armour issued to her husband was withdrawn shortly before he was shot dead. Or maybe you'd like to discuss the armoured land rovers denied our troops?”

Cheap jibes!

Both the above are nothing to do with which Govt is in power, they are the responsibility of uniformed players a long way from the ministerial level, if we can’t provide such items from a £30Billion pound defence budget then it is a sad state of affairs!

[Onan the Clumsy]

Tory, Labour. Don't get fooled like they fool you over here. If you don't like one, it doesn't mean you like the other.They're separate entities, but if you say "Bush this..." the response will invariably be "Clinton that..."

So what? Something's right or wrong, good or bad on its own merits, not in relation to its diametric opposite


...back to my cardboard box now

[highcirrus]

Former Downing Street aide Lance Price¡¯s memoirs show Blair once again in a less than favourable light when mentioning, amongst other things, that his fellow MP¡¯s have taken to "rutting on his sofa like horny teenagers when his back is turned", his former director of communications, Alastair Campbell, calls him (Blair) a "d*ckhead" and the great man himself refers to part of the UK population as the "F*cking Welsh"

Apart from this, Blair is revealed less like Dubya¡¯s poodle, despite Chris Patten writing in the Guardian of 19 September 2005 that ¡°Blair is all too likely to be judged by history as a leader who was braver in defending Bush¡¯s agenda in Iraq than he was in standing up for his own, and Britain¡¯s, strategic objectives in Europe¡± and more like "one of those bloodthirsty little terriers with delusions of grandeur". Price goes on to observe that it¡¯s a shame that so many innocent lives have been lost to help this one man feel assured of his place in the history books.

"I couldn't help feeling TB was relishing his first blooding as PM, sending the boys into action. Despite all the necessary stuff about taking action 'with a heavy heart', I think he feels it is part of his coming of age as a leader."

So far TB's coming of age ¡®ceremony¡¯ has cost the lives of almost 100 British soldiers while his reckless backing of the US in Iraq has led to countless deaths of civilians and provided motivation for the recent terrorist acts carried out in London.

Blair's love of playing the big shot on the world stage has promted him, according to BEagle's post of 28 Oct, to pronounce, "When are you going to do something about this (Iranian PM saying that Israel should be wiped off the map)? Because you imagine a state like that, with an attitude like that, having a nuclear weapon."

Hmmm. Has anyone heard more of his implied and stirring intent or was it just convenient rhetoric on the day for selective consumption? Or will his new baby, the replacement for Trident, be the long term instrument for "doing something"? I think we should be told!

[pr00ne]

highcirrus,

Actually, what Blair said was that he was worried that in future someone might be tempted to ask of him “why didn’t you do something about Iran.”

[BEagle]

But what about Bliar's failure to 'do something' about Southern Rhodesia (aka 'Zimbabwe').....?

[TeBoi]

Why not send in the Blunkmeister. He should have a bit of spare time on his hands these days. He could threaten them with the guide dog. It's probably got better teeth than the poodle who seems o have left all his teeth in Iraq/Afghanistan/Balkans/PVR queue.:hmm:

[Lyneham Lad]

Siloe Sid -

However, I am very interested in seeing how many more final straws this Governments camels back will take, in particular the day after GWB asks Bliar for support in taking a conflict to Iraq.

I take it you meant Iran?

Given the growing willingness amongst the rank and file Labour MP's to voice opposition to some of Tone's wilder flights of fancy, I doubt if he could repeat his rough-shod ride (Iraq) again in respect of taking 'action' against Iran.

[SilsoeSid]

Lyneham Las, if I may finish my edit, My answer is this.......Yes!

What an excellent thread. I must say I take BEagles corner.

Echoing back to Dan Winterlands early post, the pure size of Iran and it's terrain opens the potention for the biggest cluster fcuk this side of the Big Bang!

http://www.davidduke.com/images/iran.iraq.jpg

However, I am very interested in seeing how many more final straws this Governments camels back will take, in particular the day after GWB asks Bliar for support in taking a conflict to Iran.

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/africa/9808/22/air.strikes.follow/link.bin.laden.jpg Ahmadinejad http://barorny.com/archives/Blunkettatprayer.jpg Bin Laden
http://www.jcu.edu/images/news/gerry_adams/gerry_adams.jpg Blunkett http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/07/02/pt_mahmoud_ent-lead__200x255.jpg Adams

[buoy15]

Good spot BATS

Can you remind us of the sitting members of the UN Security Council - "the BIG 5"

Why are not Israel, Pakistan, India, China or Iran included?

Surely, in the present climate, these states are world players, or am I missing something?

[Maple 01]

Risking a waaah here but China is a permanent member of the UNSC......

[Onan the Clumsy]

Are those names incorrectly placed or do I need to go back to terrorist recognition school?



Notice one thing in common though?





...they all have beards. I can think of one of my old girlfriends who'd fit right in on both counts :ugh:

[highcirrus]

pr00ne

The thing to realise is that Lance Price's words "help this one man feel assured of his place in the history books" are key to the individual. Blair is merely covering his ar*e as usual so that in the future, if/when things have gone further down-hill with Iran, he can, in his own version of history, show himself to have been the great statesman warning everyone of the upcoming exacerbation of problems with that country. You notice that he doesn't have a plan to deal with, or solution to, the latest problem - he's merely thrown in his marker and moved on to other areas where the Great Helmsman can sow similar future proofing markers.

I'm so utterly unimpressed with his posturing leadership style and I'd guess that it's a similar feeling, mingled with contempt for his consistent mendacity and obfuscation, that leads other Blair detractors to share the same jaundiced sentiment.

[JessTheDog]

The next few months will be filled with joy, as Bliar is almost certainly in a downward spiral, after the events of the last couple of weeks!

[An Teallach]

Yes, we can only pray that the number of NuLabour long knives coming out of the woodwork over the next few weeks will rack up faster than a Scottish Tory leader's taxi meter.

[Anotherpost75]

Looks like Bliar is not only a "simpering little whore" to the Bush administration but also the same kind of whore to his version of history.

I personally can't wait to see the back of him.

[Proletarian]

Tony Blair and New Labour

Like many people in this country, I don’t consider myself ‘political’ in any sense - I have never belonged to any political party and, although my vote has usually been cast more to the right than left over the last 40 odd years, no particular party could ever been guaranteed my support in a general election.

Like my others, I suppose my antipathy towards politicians in this country generally deepened during the John Major administration, where money-grubbing inadequates appeared more interested in lining their own pockets than serving the interests of the electorate. Whatever some commentators choose to say about John Major, and leaving aside his leg-over with Edwina, I would maintain that he was an essentially decent, intelligent and honest individual. Unfortunately he was also weakened and at times utterly hamstrung by a razor-thin majority and, as a consequence, allowed himself to be surrounded by some shysters and outright crooks. Like everyone else at the time, I was glad to see the back of him and his administration – at the time I had a vote in Major’s constituency and even voted for the Referendum Party in protest.

Blair and New Labour seemed almost too good to be true, particularly his promise for a ‘whiter than white administration'. Time has shown that Blair himself is as bad as any of the sleezy creeps that infested Major’s administration. He and his dreadful wife are a pair of serial liars, who have spent much of their time in Downing Street trying to find new ways to bury their snouts in the money trough of crooked businessmen and corrupt foreign politicians. He is serially addicted to ‘willy-waving’ in his attempts to appear a front-rank international statesman and whilst happy to commit British forces here, there and everywhere, lacks the personal integrity to ensure they are either adequately funded or equipped for the task in hand.

With a major deployment to Afghanistan planned for 2006 appearing rapidly over the horizon, I think that the UK armed forces are facing a real personnel crisis. After being repeatedly lied to and betrayed by Blair, service personnel are now leaving the armed forces in record numbers. Of course some people will try and disguise the true figures, but they cannot hide the fact that far fewer experienced men and women are extending their service or they’re taking the opportunity to PVR or buy themselves out. The TA is also haemorrhaging experienced personnel at a rate never experienced before and, if current trends continue, will be even less than useless as an effective back up to the regular Army.

I would like to see the back of Blair and his incompetent, sleezy administration, but I frankly doubt that over time the Tories or anyone else would be any better. The sad fact is that in recent years almost everyone in this country has been badly served by the vast majority of the politicians we have chosen to elect, but unfortunately in a democratic country that’s what sometimes happens – but in time it might change. In the meantime, no matter what else he does whilst he hangs on in office, Blair’s own epitaph should be as follows: Tony Blair was a corrupt, serial liar who, despite quite limited ability, somehow managed to remain in office only because at the time the opposition were utterly useless.

“Power is what men seek, and any group that gets it will abuse it. It is the same old story” Lincoln Steffens

[WorkingHard]

"Both the above are nothing to do with which Govt is in power, they are the responsibility of uniformed players a long way from the ministerial level, if we can’t provide such items from a £30Billion pound defence budget then it is a sad state of affairs"

Quote from above which EVERYONE should heed

[Anotherpost75]

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/st_albion/albion.jpg

Proletarian Nice post and you mention that:

"Tony Blair was a corrupt, serial liar who, despite quite limited ability, somehow managed to remain in office only because at the time the opposition were utterly useless."

Maybe Saint Tone gets help to stay in power from another quarter?

[mystic_meg]

.."never trust a man (or woman, Conan) with a beard" my old Gran used to say - "If he can't be ar*ed shaving, what else is he good for?"

Blunkett: It's not like he didn't see it coming, is it? (Is it?)

[Roland Pulfrew]

WorkingHard and Proone. £30B? More Noo Liarbour spin? Now reduce that amount by the RAB and depreciation charges inflicted upon (all?) government departments and you will see that the true cash figure is closer to £24B. Not that that is an insignifciant amount (but it is only a quarter of that given to the bloated NHS and only a third of the equally bloated social security budget).

Now lets look at this governments procurement policy (NOTE government NOT military senior officers). How often are the military directed to buy a weapons system which is more expensive than that recommended by the procurement teams? Lets start with Meteor and the Hawk replacement. In the case of the Hawk the cost was approx 1/3 more than the rival solution. Both met the requirement but the MOD were directed to buy Hawk (surely nothing to do with the fact the factory is in Two Jags constituency?). Did HMT provide the 1/3 additional required? Did they b*ggery! That 1/3 had to be found from "savings and efficiency" measures from within the MOD (for which read cuts). Perhaps part of those savings were in not procuring more body armour or armoured Land Rovers!

To say that the government are removed from procurement decisions is utter b*ll*cks.

[pr00ne]

Roland Pulfrew,

Not just ALL Gov’t departments but the rest of the real world, RAB is a standard accounting practice used by commerce and industry the world over AND IT WAS INTRODUCED BY THE TORIES.

I never said the Govt are removed from procurement decisions, I said they as individuals have nothing to do with the lack of armoured Land Rovers or individual body armour in Iraq, those actions are way way down the food chain and are uniformed decisions.

As to the Hawk, so you think it a better procurement move to adopt an unproven, twin engined design of Russian origin that is the result of a failed commercial partnership and has been bought by no-one else and totally ignore the existing in-place infrastructure, experience and support facilities of the current Hawk fleet?

Glad YOU don’t work in procurement, or do you?

[Roland Pulfrew]

prOOne

First I never said which government introduced RAB, if it was the Tories then it was the Tories (I did not support them at the last 2 general elections so not sure what your point is).

Secondly RAB and all its effects hit the MOD in 2002/03, under the LABOUR government. RAB may be a good way for industry and business to keep an eye on their holdings/net worth etc but largely is immaterial to a non profit making organisation. The effects of RAB have been rediculous within the MOD, probably through poor advice and lack of training. Why else did we see armoured Land Rovers (which the MOD have bought and paid for) being sold off to avoid RAB and depreciation charges only to be bought back (at much inflated prices) when we needed them. Good use of the taxpayers money? I think not.

I see you do not deny the main thrust of the argument which is that ON PAPER the MOD receive £30B, but they do not get £30B cash. £6-7B is "returned" to HMT in RAB and depreciation charges. The MOD do not therefore get to "spend" £30B on people and equipment.

Next as the MOD/DPA now work in 'whole life costs', the decisions to procure new kit are made on the costs of all elements including infrastructure etc. Much of the infrastructure would not need to be changed nor would much of the GSE. As to unproven design etc etc much of our kit would never be procured if we stuck to the "Well its a Land Rover* replacement so we must buy a new Land Rover*" argument that you seem to advocate.

*- Insert as required; Hawk, submarine, aircraft carrier, Harrier, Hercules.

Much of the "experience" we have on the Hawk T1 will be of limited benefit as the 127 is significantly different from the T1 anyway.

And you also miss the point that government directed procurements such as the Hawk do have a major impact on what else is bought. The additional costs required to buy Hawk (approx 1/3 more expensive than the opposition) have to be found from within the Defence budget - it is not provided by HMT. So the MOD and DPA recommend the alternative, the Government direct the Hawk but do not provide additional funds, so the extra 1/3 has to be found from within the EP. That means other procurements are delayed, or reduced in size, or cancelled. The decisions as to what goes are decision conferenced by staffs from DEC (MOD), DPA, RP Staffs, DGE's Dept etc etc. All decisions go to the IAB and the budget is signed off by SofS. Sadly therefore government directed procurements, directed by individuals who sit around the Cabinet, do have an impact on what is procured at other levels. If you need to find another £ x million for the government directed and therefore mandated kit something else has to go - simple!

Sorry - bit off topic, I apologise.:uhoh:

[JessTheDog]

The toothless poodle has had the last remaining molars forcefully removed by a size 12 boot, bearing a characteristic portcullis footprint....

[pr00ne]

JessTheDog,

It's called democracy, it's the system being used for what it was designed for.

[JessTheDog]

Yes, the worm has turned. I don't think the UK is big enough for the Dear Leader and an active Parliament. One of them will have to go.....

[TeBoi]

Found this today:

http://www.thomasscott.net/flash/blair/

The guy looks familiar........:)

[jstars2]

Ex-envoy defies Blair on Iraq war

Sarah Lyall, New York Times

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2005

London. On Monday, 7 November, the former British ambassador to the United States accused Prime Minister Tony Blair of squandering a golden opportunity to push the United States to delay the invasion of Iraq.

On Tuesday, he characterized Blair's government as, mostly, "a crowd of pygmies."

These assessments, and others, appear in a memoir by the former ambassador, Christopher Meyer, which is being excerpted in British newspapers. Although Blair's Labour government is affecting an insouciance about Meyer's unflattering analysis, the book is proving a huge embarrassment at a time when the prime minister is confronting restiveness in his own party and sturdier than usual challenges from the Conservative opposition.

Meyer, who supported the invasion of Iraq, was known as a skilled ambassador with impeccable contacts who witnessed, or took part in, much of the behind-the-scenes maneuvering that led up to the war. That he has broken so completely with the British government tradition of discretion and loyalty, publishing his book so soon after the events he describes - and while Blair is still in office - makes it particularly shocking.

Meyer is now back in London, where he works as chairman of the Press Complaints Commission. He told The Guardian that he did not write the book, titled "D.C. Confidential," for the money and that he planned to donate the proceeds from the newspaper serializations to several children's charities.

Meyer is particularly damning about what he sees as the rush to war in Iraq, accusing the British government and the Bush administration of being ill prepared to deal with the aftermath of the invasion.

"History's verdict," he writes of the war, "looks likely to be that it was terminally flawed both in conception and execution."

In the book, Meyer charges that Blair could have used his influence to delay the Iraq war by six months or so - buying crucial time to determine whether Saddam Hussein had unconventional weapons, to seek a second UN resolution authorizing the use of military intervention, and to formulate a coherent long-term plan for post-Saddam Iraq.

"Indeed, if it all went wrong at the UN, and the U.S. was faced with going to war alone, it seemed to me that Bush might blink," Meyer writes.

[Anotherpost75]

Looks like there’s blood in the water and the sharks have picked it up. Can’t be long now before Bliar’s MPs start biting chunks out of him, leading to a feeding frenzy, ripping him to shreds. Brown and buddies must surely now be positioning for the imminent carnage?

BBC Web Site. 10 November 2005

Blair defeated over terror laws

Tony Blair says his authority is intact despite suffering his first House of Commons defeat as prime minister.

He said he hoped MPs do not rue the day they rejected his call to allow police to detain terror suspects for up to 90 days without charging them.

MPs voted against by 322 votes to 291, with 49 Labour MPs rebelling, but later backed a proposal to extend the detention time limit to 28 days.

Conservative leader Michael Howard said Mr Blair should resign.
Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy warned Mr Blair could become a lame duck leader.

Following the defeat MPs backed by 323 to 290 votes a Labour backbench MP's proposal to extend the detention time limit to 28 days, from the current 14 days.

And, while the prime minister is a fighter and - until now - a survivor, the fact he has already announced he will quit before the next election may make that pressure for him to go soon irresistible.

The defeat came after Mr Blair stunned Westminster MPs by suddenly abandoning plans to seek a cross-party consensus and instead launching a ferocious campaign in support of the 90 day option.

On that he appeared to be ignoring the advice of many in his party, including Home Secretary Charles Clarke who had throughout been suggesting he was open to a compromise and only changed tune at the last moment.

Chief police officers, who originally proposed the detention period, lobbied MPs for their case and ministers and Blair loyalists did everything to win over dissenters.

Mr Blair attempted to shave off some Tory backbench votes by suggesting they were in the "wrong place" on the issue and had gone soft on terror.

There has been a suggestion that Mr Blair knew he was already facing serious revolts over his so-called "legacy" welfare reforms and decided to pick a knockdown fight on this issue instead, believing he had the support of the public.

It is also possible he hoped the black and white nature of the issue - in which he effectively suggested MPs were either with him and the police or against them - would concentrate minds.
And, had he won, he would have felt strengthened in his other reforms and his rebels weakened.

In the event there appeared to be a backlash at his tactics and rhetoric and what many saw as the attempt to paint them as soft on terror.

And at the end of the day, the prime minister failed. Not by a bit but comprehensively. His other reforms will now also face serious trouble.

[Maple 01]

jstars2'
As Private Eye put it

'The Ultimate Bore'

By Sir Crispin Mandarin

Among Sir Crispin's sensational claims are the following

The war in Iraq was a bit of a cock-up
Blair supported Bush instead of not supporting him
Er.....
....That's it...

……..If only my talents had been recognised earlier. World War Two would never have happened.

Tomorrow
9/11 How it could have been avoided if only I had know about it in advance




Face it, bloke's got an axe to grind, a book to sell and a syndication deal with that unbiased 'newspaper' The Daily Mail (Of 'Hurrah for the Black Shirts' fame)

[jstars2]

Maple 01

You mentioned that: "Face it, bloke's got an axe to grind, a book to sell and a syndication deal with that unbiased 'newspaper' The Daily Mail."

May I point out to you that the distinctly left wing Grauniad has just published its third extract from the book. Here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,1637327,00.html)

Also an interesting cartoon from the same stable, which might indicate to you the way the wind is starting to blow.

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2005/11/08/bell512.jpg

[highcirrus]

Sir Christopher Meyer, lately Her Britannic Majesty's Ambassador in Washington, says in his newly published book, amongst other things, that Mr Blair was seduced by the glamour of American power, and did not use his leverage to slow down the timetable of war with Saddam.

Perhaps this observation, more than any other, lends validity to the perjorative - that simpering little whore Blair, quoted elswhere in this thread.

However, I think that what is now important, if one believes in (and hopes for) the imminent demise of the Great Helmsman, is the likely stance of his erstwhile colleague Gordon Brown, when circumstances eventually impose the full terms of the Grantita agreement, reached many years ago between the two and serially welshed on, in characteristic form, by Bliar.

Brown is old style socialism writ large but packaged artfully. He will not have a cosy relationship with Dubya. He will continue his cold aloofness towards the UK armed forces. And, importantly, he will reappraise the disposition of these forces at the earliest decent opportunity (or even before). Do not look for further commitment towards USA - in fact look for the reverse.

The up-side would be, in my humble estimation, a reappearance of the old style, to quote M. Thatcher, clear blue water, between Labour and the Tories.

Perhaps we might shortly be seeing light at the end of the tunnel?

[Anotherpost75]

Joined up Defence/Foreign Policy?

BBC - 25 September 2005 - Prime Minister Tony Blair has denied reports that British soldiers will start withdrawing from Iraq next May.

Any exit strategy "depends on the job being done", he told BBC's Sunday AM.

Observer - 25 September 2005 - Reports in the Observer newspaper suggested that Britain had already "privately" informed Japan of its plans to begin withdrawing from southern Iraq next May.

BBC – 13 November 2005 - British troops could leave Iraq by the end of next year, the country's president Jalal Talabani has predicted.

Defence Secretary John Reid told the BBC a pull-out beginning next year was a possibility.

[jstars2]

More fun in the offing, chums. This from Private Eye 28 Oct – 10 Nov 05:

“The British Cabinet now owes it to those it has sent to their deaths to remove the army from Iraq with expedition and dignity,” Simon Jenkins wrote in his Guardian column last Wednesday (19 October 05).

“Having just spent a week with the army. I have no doubt of its morale and its loyalty. I also have no doubt of its ruthlessness in joint memoir operations. In the not too distant future, Blair, Straw, Reid and Hoon are going to know the full meaning of ‘shock and awe’.”

What memoirs can he have in mind? Though he omitted to mention it, Jenkins travelled to Iraq with General Sir Mike Jackson, Chief of the General Staff, who is due to retire soon. Jackson has observed with interest the success of recent memoirs by General Sir Rupert Smith and Colonel Tim Collins, but reckons he could do far better. It’s a dead cert that he’ll sign a lucrative publishing deal as soon as he hangs up his beret. And, if Jenkins’s veiled hint is any guide, he will give full value for money.

[RileyDove]

What is interesting is that Blair and his mates turn on Sir Christopher but when Blunket released his book which cast a less
than flattering light on some of his compatriots there was little mention of it!
Anyway Tony has that house to pay for and a high maintainance wife so I would expect the British Expeditionary
Forces to be carrying out a few more of his whims yet to fill the pages of that autobiography!

[4Greens]

A Regiment of Royal Machines knocked over Persia in the last big one!

[highcirrus]

Still all quiet on the "When are you going to do something about this?" front, as per the start of this thread. I know that Tony is currently very busy sorting out his place in the history books and covering up the true extent of Mrs Bliar's book/lecture tour earnings from revealing details of life at No 10 with the Dear Leader, but surely the following should get even a toothless poodle yapping again?

BBC News 16 November 2005

Iran 'resumes uranium processing'

Diplomats said the move would hamper efforts to restart talks

Iran has begun to process a new batch of uranium to convert it to a gas (uranium hexafluoride - UF6) that can be enriched into the material for nuclear bombs, diplomats say. "Conversion has resumed," a diplomat close to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna said.

The move comes despite heavy pressure from the US and Europe for Iran to cease all nuclear activity.

Iran denies Western claims that it has a secret nuclear weapons programme, saying it just wants nuclear power.

Uranium enriched to a low level is used to produce nuclear fuel, while further enrichment (production of UF6) makes it suitable for use in atomic weapons. Diplomats told the BBC that IAEA inspectors had witnessed the new round of uranium conversion at Iran's facility in Isfahan.

Another said the move would hamper efforts to restart negotiations between Europe and Iran over its nuclear programme.

"It's not good news, no, not at all. Because people were trying to arrange for new talks and now it's more difficult," said a senior European diplomat quoted by the AFP news agency.

Diplomats told AFP that after this round of conversion Iran might have enough UF6 to make 10 bombs.

[clicker]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Diplomats told the BBC that IAEA inspectors had witnessed the new round of uranium conversion at Iran's facility in Isfahan."

"Diplomats told AFP that after this round of conversion Iran might have enough UF6 to make 10 bombs."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normally these idiots will only let you know whats good for them, rather than whats good for us.

[Anotherpost75]

A great Rational for War!

Peter Oborne – Observer/Spectator/Express etc

New and shocking (as revealed in the memoirs of former UK ambassador in Washington, Sir Christopher Meyer) is the sheer genuflection (of PM Blair) before President Bush. The thought never seems to cross Tony Blair’s mind that the United Kingdom is an independent state, with discrete interests and values of our own. The British Prime Minister’s parting instruction to (Ambassador) Meyer, issued through Chief of Staff Jonathon Powell, was wretched: “Get up the arse of the White House and stay there”.

Further:

One major reason for the fiasco of the Iraq invasion (writes Meyer) was the failure to plan for the aftermath of victory. Britain was the only ally of the United States which could have remedied this omission. Thanks to what can only be regarded as negligence by the Prime Minister, we failed to do so. “Had Britain so insisted”, says Meyer in a deadly comment, “Iraq after Saddam might have avoided the violence that may yet prove fatal to the entire enterprise”.

Reassuring to be under such reliable and competent leadership!

[DuaneDibley]

And the alternative is?.....

[jstars2]

Hey Duane, you been living under a rock for the past couple of months?

[DuaneDibley]

J2

More like a bridge actually......

[pr00ne]

"Britain was the only ally of the United States which could have
remedied this omission"


???????????????????????????????????

Why? How?

What magic powers does the UK possess that could have stopped the nonsense going on over there, surely the problem exists BECAUSE we invaded them in the first place?