Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK politics - Hamsterwheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK politics - Hamsterwheel

Old 23rd Nov 2016, 23:51
  #7541 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 76
Posts: 452
RabK Have a wee look at the voter numbers - 1.6 million voted to stay in the EU,2.1 million voted to stay in the UK.
bcgallacher is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 00:36
  #7542 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 503
And your wee point being what exactly? A majority voted to remain in both unions. The significance of the actual numbers who voted can be interpreted in multiple ways by both sides of each argument, so 'spin' away if that's what floats your boat - it matters not.
rab-k is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 09:04
  #7543 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 373
Diversity can quickly become Division .
Yugoslavia is a perfect example of how quickly enforced tolerance can disappear .
The same fear factors are being used by some to destroy the Unity of what is left of the United Kingdom .
Trying to make any such comparison between those two countries almost makes it look as if you have never visited either of them!
Trossie is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 09:08
  #7544 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 373
Britain will leave the EU.
Scotland will remain in the UK.
The SNP will disappear into the past as a hiccup of history.
Britain will be prosperous due to the ingenuity of the British people.
Trossie is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 13:16
  #7545 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,945
Well he certainly got one ting right

Tony Blair 'to help the UK's politically homeless' - BBC News

Mr Blair added: "I can't come into frontline politics. There's just too much hostility, and also there are elements of the media who would literally move to destroy mode if I tried to do that."


and rightly so, the bastard should be prosecuted for his lies in the 45 minute bolleaux!
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 13:20
  #7546 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,206
What lies would those be then?
PDR1 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 13:29
  #7547 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 936
" Also so long as we maintain OUR rule of law developed over the years by Celt, Anglo Saxon and Norman and utterly reject imported medieval tribal customs.

Basil.....quite !.....alas, you seem to forget all of the above were a distinctly diverse lot.....and....you forgot about the Romans !...

There again, it seems the only thing seared into your memory was a "statuesque blond F/O straddling the centre console "....so no surprise really ..
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 14:35
  #7548 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 67
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
What lies would those be then?
That would be the WMD debacle. Those on the loony right react to considered actions by the people they hate with this sort of rubbish. The security services clearly supplied duff information on Saddam. Personally I don't think that Blair had any effect on the prosecution of the Iraq war as GWB would have gone in anyway. Of course had Blair turned down the invitation the The Mail, Sun, Telegraph etc would have cried that he failed to support the Special Relationship.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 14:43
  #7549 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
From that well known loony right wing rag:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...chilcot-report

The Chilcot inquiry has delivered a damning verdict on the decision by former prime minister Tony Blair to commit British troops to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. It says:

The UK chose to join the invasion before peaceful options had been exhausted

Blair deliberately exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein

Blair promised George Bush: ’I will be with you, whatever’

The decision to invade was made in unsatisfactory circumstances

George Bush largely ignored UK advice on postwar planning

There was no imminent threat from Saddam

Britain’s intelligence agencies produced ‘flawed information’

The UK military were ill-equipped for the task

UK-US relations would not have been harmed if UK stayed out of war

Blair ignored warnings on what would happen in Iraq after invasion

The UK had no influence on Iraq’s postwar US-run administration

The UK did not achieve its objectives in Iraq

The government did not try hard enough to keep a tally of Iraqi civilian casualties
engineer(retard) is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 14:59
  #7550 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 67
Posts: 60
I didn't bother to mention the loony left too, I thought their venom went without saying with Stop The War Coaltion etc. the Corbynites hate Blair more than the Tories.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 16:16
  #7551 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,206
The UK chose to join the invasion before peaceful options had been exhausted

We did that in 1939 as well

Blair deliberately exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein

Arguably we did that in 1939 too - the germans clearly had no means of successfully getting a sufficient invasion fleet across the channel to threaten the UK.

Blair promised George Bush: ’I will be with you, whatever’

We did THAT in 1939 as well, although it was for Poland and France rather than the Republic of Texas.

The decision to invade was made in unsatisfactory circumstances


Galipoli anyone? Churchill did that twice...

George Bush largely ignored UK advice on postwar planning

As did Roosevelt in 1945 - the result was a partitioned europe. That went well.

There was no imminent threat from Saddam

In 1939 Hitler was claiming Britain and Germany were natural allies with a shared cultural heritage.

Britain’s intelligence agencies produced ‘flawed information’


So what's new? The political leadership provide the funding and work with what they are given. Then as now any politician who tries to interfere in the operation of the inteligence services generally gets pillories by the unthinking morons in the press and the general public.

The UK military were ill-equipped for the task

The UK military will ALWAYS be ill-equipped so long as governments are fixated with fritering money away on hospitals, schools and pensions instead of wisely investing it in a standiong model army of 20 million men with the equipment to match. Unfortunatelyy the military are a crisis response system, and it will NEVER be possible to (a) anticipate all possible threats and needs, or (b) tell the bad guys "I say chaps, can you just stand there for about 10 years while I get tooled up?"

UK-US relations would not have been harmed if UK stayed out of war

An intersting conclusion. It's not possible to actually know, of course, but US-France relations have never really recovered from the days of les singe qui mange du fromage et a dit "kamerad" so I wonder about it.

Blair ignored warnings on what would happen in Iraq after invasion

Perhaps. But as "doing nothing" wasn't really an option there may not have been choices that had no bad outcomes.

The UK had no influence on Iraq’s postwar US-run administration

Did we want it?

The UK did not achieve its objectives in Iraq

The UK did not achieve ALL of its objectives in Iraq. Not the same thing at all.

The government did not try hard enough to keep a tally of Iraqi civilian casualties

Nor did we create a register of casualties in Dresden, the Mohne Valley or numerous other battles. Is there some new law that says we have to?

So my bottom like is that most of Chillcot's conclusions were just 20-20 hindsight - pointless heckling. And pretty well every criticism of Blair could just as easily be applied to Winston. But armchair hecklers don't have the courage to walk into trafagar square and spout about winston-the-liar or winston-the-war-criminal.

Saddam wanted us to believe that he had WMDs - he paid the price. We didn't find any WMDs - but we also haven't found any Dark Matter either.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 16:20
  #7552 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
PDR, you had best take it up with Chilcot, its his report.
engineer(retard) is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 16:25
  #7553 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,206
Clearly the armchair hecklers don't have the wit to discuss the points either - they just heckle and then when challenged say "It wasn't me sir - it was that Chillcott boy wot said it!".

You cited it, so if you're not just blindly parrotting it you should be prepared to debate the points.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 17:21
  #7554 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,945
You asked a question and got an answer, and as previously shown on here when the answer is not to your taste you resort to your trademark sneer, not a very pleasant trait young man.
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 17:26
  #7555 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
PDR1, a judicial enquiry consuming 10s of thousands of manhours and millions of pounds came to some substantial conclusions based upon the available evidence. Instead of behaving like a brainless keyboard warrior, why don't you read the report and then explain why you think Chilcot came to the wrong conclusions.

Once you have done that, come back and make your point with some of us that had first hand experience of the events.
engineer(retard) is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 18:23
  #7556 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 936
"Ex UK Chancellor desperately in need of funds, now reduced to near poverty. Please give generously to this worthy cause and individual."


And lo and behold, they did !.....this despite an appalling track record when in office.

Maybe they were swayed by his "man of the people" image in recent times..hard hats, hi-viz jackets etc

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-from-speeches
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 18:59
  #7557 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,679
Don't you wish you could earn £300,000/month giving speeches.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2016, 19:11
  #7558 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post

So my bottom like is that most of Chillcot's conclusions were just 20-20 hindsight - pointless heckling. And pretty well every criticism of Blair could just as easily be applied to Winston. But armchair hecklers don't have the courage to walk into trafagar square and spout about winston-the-liar or winston-the-war-criminal.

Saddam wanted us to believe that he had WMDs - he paid the price. We didn't find any WMDs - but we also haven't found any Dark Matter either.

PDR
You missed out the fact that the "dodgy dossier", that was used to convince parliament that there was a real and credible threat of WMD being deployed within 45 minutes was, in fact, plagiarised in large part from a student thesis, not credible intelligence reports, presumably because they (meaning Tony Blair and his cronies, who were bending over backwards to keep Bush Junior happy) didn't have time to create something original.

I have direct knowledge from one of the weapons inspectors, who repeatedly said there was no credible WMD capability in Iraq at that time, and what's more it would take, in his opinion (as a well-respected scientist) many months, perhaps years, for Iraq to gain a WMD capability. Off the record, this same inspector said that, in his view, it would probably take a decade before Iraq obtained a rapidly deployable WMD capability, perhaps longer.

All this was fed directly to Tony Blair at the time, via the intelligence agencies (who almost certainly watered it down - no one was prepared to go against what Blair was set on doing). He created an atmosphere where it was practically career suicide for anyone to gainsay him over Iraq, which is not a healthy way to run any government.

There was a tremendous amount of scientific effort put into trying to find WMD capability in Iraq, driven, in part, by the limited chemical weapons attacks against the Kurds and by Israeli concerns over the capability of the converted SCUD missiles. Despite all this effort, nothing could be found that supported the case that there was any "ready for use" WMD capability, let alone one that could be deployed in 45 minutes, as Blair claimed.

Hindsight has, indeed, confirmed what was already very clear before we went to war. Of course Hussein wanted the world to believe he had greater capabilities than he had; that had been behind his means of retaining power for years, and was what had instigated the in-depth international investigations into what those capabilities might be. And, for what it's worth, I didn't get my information from the media or

The comparison with Churchill is crass. Throughout the 1930's there was a growing mountain of evidence that Germany was re-arming, and that it had adopted a policy of anti-Semitism. We had agreements with other states to provide them with military support in the event of Nazi aggression, and we honoured those agreements.

Certainly Churchill's government used propaganda, AFTER the outbreak of war, but there was no propaganda from him before then, Remember, he did not become Prime Minister until well after the outbreak of war. All he did prior to this was repeatedly warn that Germany was re-arming and set on a path that would lead to war - and he was absolutely right. There was nothing equivalent to the "dodgy dossier", in fact, if anything, the military capability of Nazi Germany was under-estimated in the 1930's, not massively over-estimated (with made-up intelligence) as Blair and his cronies did.
VP959 is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2016, 06:45
  #7559 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 936
"the enemy within"

Which she certainly was.

These released documents will doubtless be regarded as evidence of her "progressive thinking " by her loyal and faithful followers on here, and elsewhere.

For the rest of us who are not besotted with the reverence of evil personified, what better clarification could we wish for as to how much more damage she could have inflicted on the UK....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ite-nhs-pledge
Krystal n chips is online now  
Old 25th Nov 2016, 09:34
  #7560 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 373
"the enemy within"

That's Bliar, isn't it? (Past and present.)

(What does the Guardian have to say on that?)
Trossie is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.