General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Bliar can be impeached, by the House of Lords, but the motion must be instigated in the House of Commons.
The general's comments are most welcome and are reflective of the changed relationship between the Armed Forces and the government.
If the UK decides to take on Iran/Syria/Iraq again in the limited time he has left, then I believe this changed relationship will be very conspicuous, with resignations of commissions under the following circumstances:
a. if any case for war whatsoever is presented by Bliar;
b. if his successor attempts to go to war without both a parliamentary vote (no lies dressed up as intelligence) and the full disclosure of the legal advice of the Attorney General (and any associated discussions).
I suspect the spooks would revolt as well rather than have their name ruined by association with propaganda dressed up as intelligence and, as the cases of Katherine Gun and the two Labour MPs who leaked information to the Democratic Party demonstrate, the OSA is not the guarantee against embarrassment it once was.
Watch the phoney war in Afghanistan pick up momentum...mission creep ahead!
The general's comments are most welcome and are reflective of the changed relationship between the Armed Forces and the government.
If the UK decides to take on Iran/Syria/Iraq again in the limited time he has left, then I believe this changed relationship will be very conspicuous, with resignations of commissions under the following circumstances:
a. if any case for war whatsoever is presented by Bliar;
b. if his successor attempts to go to war without both a parliamentary vote (no lies dressed up as intelligence) and the full disclosure of the legal advice of the Attorney General (and any associated discussions).
I suspect the spooks would revolt as well rather than have their name ruined by association with propaganda dressed up as intelligence and, as the cases of Katherine Gun and the two Labour MPs who leaked information to the Democratic Party demonstrate, the OSA is not the guarantee against embarrassment it once was.
Watch the phoney war in Afghanistan pick up momentum...mission creep ahead!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
The Mail on Sunday article which started this off is by Martin Bell and is a preview/plug of his documentary - 'Iraq: The Failure of War' on Channel 4 at 7.30pm on Friday 13th Jan.
It includes contributions from General Sir Rupert Smith and Denis Healey (who was a beachmaster at Anzio).
It includes contributions from General Sir Rupert Smith and Denis Healey (who was a beachmaster at Anzio).
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Isn't it just a little creepy what low coverage this story has?
How many of you would agree that Blair has political control of major newspaers?
How many of you would agree that Blair has political control of major newspaers?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
No matter what BLIAr does, like the devil, he gets away with it!
Slippery is not the word for this swine - he should have been in chains and rotting in The Tower of London long ago.
Even MP's can't lever the devious devil out of office!
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...37&SESSION=875
EDM 1088
CONDUCT OF GOVERNMENT POLICY IN RELATION TO THE WAR AGAINST IRAQ22.11.2005
Hogg, Douglas
That this House believes that there should be a select committee of seven honourable Members, being members of Her Majesty's Privy Council, to review the way in which the responsibilities of Government were discharged in relation to Iraq and all matters relevant thereto, in the period leading up to military action in that country in March 2003 and in its aftermath.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ref the war in Iraq - and let's not mince words - it is a war, it was illegal and BLIAr should pay dearly.
TG
Slippery is not the word for this swine - he should have been in chains and rotting in The Tower of London long ago.
Even MP's can't lever the devious devil out of office!
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...37&SESSION=875
EDM 1088
CONDUCT OF GOVERNMENT POLICY IN RELATION TO THE WAR AGAINST IRAQ22.11.2005
Hogg, Douglas
That this House believes that there should be a select committee of seven honourable Members, being members of Her Majesty's Privy Council, to review the way in which the responsibilities of Government were discharged in relation to Iraq and all matters relevant thereto, in the period leading up to military action in that country in March 2003 and in its aftermath.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ref the war in Iraq - and let's not mince words - it is a war, it was illegal and BLIAr should pay dearly.
TG
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Yarpy,
Don't be ridiculous, have you read the major newspapers coverage of Blair?
"Political control of major papers" Get real man.
This story will go nowhere because it will run out of steam, it has nowhere to go.
Blair did not declare war-fact.
Don't be ridiculous, have you read the major newspapers coverage of Blair?
"Political control of major papers" Get real man.
This story will go nowhere because it will run out of steam, it has nowhere to go.
Blair did not declare war-fact.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
So, by default we can assumme that:a. Alistair Campbells relationship with the press was just to facilitate as much news as possible.
b. 10 Downing Street never does a deal with a newspaper mogul as to which stories get prominence and those that don't.
Blair is a master patrician; when he topples an awful lot of very top people - industry and government - topple with him. When a distinguished figure like Gen. Rose sticks the knife in it must be like another drip from a cold tap down Blairs neck. I would be very surprised if 10 Downing Street did not try to exert pressure, where they can, to divert the story.
I wouldn't be surprised if they lit a few fires round Westminster over the next week to avert the publics gaze.
In short, pr00ne, I disagree with your position.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Interesting leader in the Grauniad - not a supporter of Blair or the war:
Leader - Tuesday January 10, 2006 - The Guardian
When a general strikes
General Sir Michael Rose's call for the prime minister to be impeached over Iraq comes in the same week that the head of the Spanish army has threatened to defy Spain's socialist government by using his forces to prevent Catalonia achieving greater autonomy. Sir Michael is a retired soldier and General José Mena Aguido a serving one (though he is now under arrest), yet both events remind us that the boundaries between democracy and the military are inescapably sensitive. There is much to support in Sir Michael's views on Iraq: that the war was a massively serious act, that it has had dire consequences for Iraq itself and the war on terror, and that Tony Blair got the politics horribly wrong. But the significance of Sir Michael's expression of view - and his comment that he would not lead his troops into a war he considers to be wrong - goes well beyond any embarrassment it causes Mr Blair or any cheer it may bring to his critics.
Iraq was a striking example of the seriously changed nature of 21st-century warfare. Those changes include the reliance on professional not conscript forces, the likely subordination of British to US or allied objectives, the continuation of "normal" life at home while wars occur, and the real-time reporting of the conflict from both sides of the battle lines. Another crucial change, again illustrated by Iraq, is that modern wars need modern legitimacy. In practice they can only take place with democratic support. To fight a modern war, governments must make and win a sometimes highly divisive argument among their citizens.
That is why, for instance, there is such lively debate about giving MPs, not the government, the final say in whether to go to war. But if civil society as a whole is now entitled to a say about a war, why not the military? Traditionally, of course, the military is the ultimate disciplined service. But a war that divides the nation is also likely to divide the military. Sir Michael was himself a divisive soldier during his Balkan war years. Many would say, on the basis of his record there, that he is not the ideal arbiter of when to stand firm in the face of tyrants and when not to do so. But the current Spanish example - to say nothing of Spain's history - is a reminder of the danger that can follow from allowing the military to make its own judgments about the actions of an elected government. If nothing else, Sir Michael's intervention dramatises the need for further thought about whether military views, and perhaps conflicting military views, should be more publicly aired as part of a modern democratic process.
Leader - Tuesday January 10, 2006 - The Guardian
When a general strikes
General Sir Michael Rose's call for the prime minister to be impeached over Iraq comes in the same week that the head of the Spanish army has threatened to defy Spain's socialist government by using his forces to prevent Catalonia achieving greater autonomy. Sir Michael is a retired soldier and General José Mena Aguido a serving one (though he is now under arrest), yet both events remind us that the boundaries between democracy and the military are inescapably sensitive. There is much to support in Sir Michael's views on Iraq: that the war was a massively serious act, that it has had dire consequences for Iraq itself and the war on terror, and that Tony Blair got the politics horribly wrong. But the significance of Sir Michael's expression of view - and his comment that he would not lead his troops into a war he considers to be wrong - goes well beyond any embarrassment it causes Mr Blair or any cheer it may bring to his critics.
Iraq was a striking example of the seriously changed nature of 21st-century warfare. Those changes include the reliance on professional not conscript forces, the likely subordination of British to US or allied objectives, the continuation of "normal" life at home while wars occur, and the real-time reporting of the conflict from both sides of the battle lines. Another crucial change, again illustrated by Iraq, is that modern wars need modern legitimacy. In practice they can only take place with democratic support. To fight a modern war, governments must make and win a sometimes highly divisive argument among their citizens.
That is why, for instance, there is such lively debate about giving MPs, not the government, the final say in whether to go to war. But if civil society as a whole is now entitled to a say about a war, why not the military? Traditionally, of course, the military is the ultimate disciplined service. But a war that divides the nation is also likely to divide the military. Sir Michael was himself a divisive soldier during his Balkan war years. Many would say, on the basis of his record there, that he is not the ideal arbiter of when to stand firm in the face of tyrants and when not to do so. But the current Spanish example - to say nothing of Spain's history - is a reminder of the danger that can follow from allowing the military to make its own judgments about the actions of an elected government. If nothing else, Sir Michael's intervention dramatises the need for further thought about whether military views, and perhaps conflicting military views, should be more publicly aired as part of a modern democratic process.
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
You are kidding, aren't you? Teflon Tone relies on the fact that by Thursday, if you were to ask the dumbed-down 'man in the street' (including many in the Armed Forces) who Michael Rose is: The reply would probably be 'Is he in celebrity big brother?'
I saw a couple of minutes of Large Male Sibling (OK, Big Brother) this a.m. as it was about George Galloway. When he confessed to being an MP some bimbette in the house with him apparently said to him - "Does that mean you work in the big room wiv the green seats..?"
Ah yes, the Great British Public...
I saw a couple of minutes of Large Male Sibling (OK, Big Brother) this a.m. as it was about George Galloway. When he confessed to being an MP some bimbette in the house with him apparently said to him - "Does that mean you work in the big room wiv the green seats..?"
Ah yes, the Great British Public...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Orac
Thank you for your post. Fine words which form the basis of a good philosphical arguement, however in simpler terms, coup d'etat would cover a lot of what you say.
This is slightly straying off track but nonetheless interesting.
Mr Proone Sir.
What on earth makes you believe :
So what's the D notice committee all about then? Has a D notice been issued to stiffle this story? If you honestly think that Mr Blair would not use every means at his disposal to deflect criticism of him or his policies, then this is a credulity which doesn't flatter you.
You also said
This is correct, however he did mislead the Hof C into authorising the use of force to (attempt) achieve his political aims the consequences of which are yet to be realised. He did appoint Lord Clutton (partisan Lord) to endorse the legality of the whole thing. Did he write Clutton's remit, the terms of reference? Probably he made everything else up!
In this country, when a General declares that he would defy a request to send his troops to war, this is a very very serious matter.
EM
Thank you for your post. Fine words which form the basis of a good philosphical arguement, however in simpler terms, coup d'etat would cover a lot of what you say.
This is slightly straying off track but nonetheless interesting.
Mr Proone Sir.
What on earth makes you believe :
Don't be ridiculous, have you read the major newspapers coverage of Blair?
"Political control of major papers" Get real man.
"Political control of major papers" Get real man.
You also said
This story will go nowhere because it will run out of steam, it has nowhere to go.
Blair did not declare war-fact.
Blair did not declare war-fact.
In this country, when a General declares that he would defy a request to send his troops to war, this is a very very serious matter.
EM
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
I wonder if Sir Michael will be called as an expert witness in the CM of the RAF doctor who refused to go to Iraq. That would probably give the story somewhere to go.
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Yarpy,
The evidence is before your very own eyes-in the NEWSPAPERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Show me ONE pro-Blair editorial.
Without exception they are all currently on Blair’s back, effectively calling him a dead man walking and playing up for all its worth a split between Blair and Gordon Brown.
The majority of the UK written media was opposed to the war in Iraq prior to UK forces being committed and is now very much highlighting all the difficulties being experienced over there daily.
Where is Alastair Campbell now?
Epsilon minus,
D Notice? don’t make me laugh!!!!!!!!!!!
It’s no good trying to persuade ME that Blair mislead the nation into war, I was and always have been expressly opposed to the war in Iraq and think it wrong in every possible way, but there is NOT the conspiracy you imagine here.
The evidence is before your very own eyes-in the NEWSPAPERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Show me ONE pro-Blair editorial.
Without exception they are all currently on Blair’s back, effectively calling him a dead man walking and playing up for all its worth a split between Blair and Gordon Brown.
The majority of the UK written media was opposed to the war in Iraq prior to UK forces being committed and is now very much highlighting all the difficulties being experienced over there daily.
Where is Alastair Campbell now?
Epsilon minus,
D Notice? don’t make me laugh!!!!!!!!!!!
It’s no good trying to persuade ME that Blair mislead the nation into war, I was and always have been expressly opposed to the war in Iraq and think it wrong in every possible way, but there is NOT the conspiracy you imagine here.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Proone
Thank you for that. Having checked my present state of consciousness I can assure you that I am not imagining (mores the pity) a conspiracy and General Rose's views on the matter support this.
Let me ask you one question though; had Mr Blair not resorted to duplicitous means to gain the assent of parliament to send troops to fight in Iraq; would we be there now?
I was and always have been expressly opposed to the war in Iraq and think it wrong in every possible way, but there is NOT the conspiracy you imagine here
Let me ask you one question though; had Mr Blair not resorted to duplicitous means to gain the assent of parliament to send troops to fight in Iraq; would we be there now?
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Epsilon,
Has it ever occurred to you that the guy just got it hopelessly and terribly wrong?
WHY would he have gone to the lengths he did? IF he had some other agenda then why wasn't it the reason he used. Do you think he WANTED to make himself a terribly unpopular PM and to have his own party turn on him? Do you think he WANTED to go down in history as the PM that took the UK to war over a series of mistakes?
Has it ever occurred to you that the guy just got it hopelessly and terribly wrong?
WHY would he have gone to the lengths he did? IF he had some other agenda then why wasn't it the reason he used. Do you think he WANTED to make himself a terribly unpopular PM and to have his own party turn on him? Do you think he WANTED to go down in history as the PM that took the UK to war over a series of mistakes?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,580
Received 438 Likes
on
231 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Either way, Blair needs to take full responsibility for the apalling debacle he has allowed to happen. When he brings our troops home, is he going to arrange for a ticker-tape celebration? Or will it be more like when the USA saw the return of it's Vietnam veterans? Let's hope whoever succeeds him will ensure our society looks after them as they surely deserve, because considering his past record, I can't see him doing it. I can't even see him staying in the UK in his retirement.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
At the moment Teflon Tony appears more interested in bringing retribution to our Chavs' yoblets than owning up to his own misdemeanors. He did a pretty good job with the power washer on the graffiti though, so perhaps there is a job for him if they ever get him out of No 10.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
To quote myself:
So, this week Bliar launches his 'respect' agenda and we learn, contentiously, that the law now allows people to be thrown out of their own homes, without recourse to trial, for being bad neighbours.
The press are all on to this one and will probably let the story of Gen Rose slip.
Advantage Tony and no new balls.
I would be very surprised if 10 Downing Street did not try to exert pressure, where they can, to divert the story.
The press are all on to this one and will probably let the story of Gen Rose slip.
Advantage Tony and no new balls.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Proone
Is this a mitigation plea?
You haven't answered my question. If the PM had not have hoodwinked parliament would we have sent troops to fight in Iraq ???
Michael Bell MP, Michael Mansfield QC, General Rose. Stand up and be counted please. The PM cannot be allowed to get away with what he has done.
Has it ever occurred to you that the guy just got it hopelessly and terribly wrong?
You haven't answered my question. If the PM had not have hoodwinked parliament would we have sent troops to fight in Iraq ???
Michael Bell MP, Michael Mansfield QC, General Rose. Stand up and be counted please. The PM cannot be allowed to get away with what he has done.
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
Epsilon minus,
How the bloody hell should I know?
If anyone wants to take down the PM on this then they would have to take down the Cabinet, the Chiefs of the Defence Staff, the leader of the opposition, the heads of the Security services and the top legal bods in the Gov't, do you REALLY think that is in the least bit practicable or is actually going to happen?
The UK did not act alone, so you would have to go after the equivalent folk in the US, and in Italy, and Spain and Australia, and Poland and so it goes on.
I speak as a Barrister when I say that this has not one iota of a chance of succeeding, I speak as pr00ne when I say I wish it did.
How the bloody hell should I know?
If anyone wants to take down the PM on this then they would have to take down the Cabinet, the Chiefs of the Defence Staff, the leader of the opposition, the heads of the Security services and the top legal bods in the Gov't, do you REALLY think that is in the least bit practicable or is actually going to happen?
The UK did not act alone, so you would have to go after the equivalent folk in the US, and in Italy, and Spain and Australia, and Poland and so it goes on.
I speak as a Barrister when I say that this has not one iota of a chance of succeeding, I speak as pr00ne when I say I wish it did.
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
"At the moment Teflon Tony appears more interested in bringing retribution to our Chavs' yoblets than owning up"
And the very best of luck to him! Much as I dislike him, at least he's doing something about these nasty little $ods who cause so many problems. But weird-beard trendy-lefty schoolteachers of the 1970s, bleeding heart liberal political correctos and nanny state policies have all been to blame, as of course has 1980s Thatcher-greed mentality.
Impeach Blair over Iraq? Fat chance.
And the very best of luck to him! Much as I dislike him, at least he's doing something about these nasty little $ods who cause so many problems. But weird-beard trendy-lefty schoolteachers of the 1970s, bleeding heart liberal political correctos and nanny state policies have all been to blame, as of course has 1980s Thatcher-greed mentality.
Impeach Blair over Iraq? Fat chance.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: General Sir Michael Rose calls for Tony Blair's Impeachment
they would have to take down the Cabinet, the Chiefs of the Defence Staff, the leader of the opposition, the heads of the Security services and the top legal bods in the Gov't,
If Cameron sneaks into a power vacuum in the centre ground then this country has no opposition. The managed society will be fully upon us with a choice of three centrist parties. If you disagree with a major issue you will have nowhere to go.