The Chilcot Report

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, krisskross said:

ts all very good to have known these things, but having a report like this published adds certainty and evidence that previously was not available.

Reading the whole 2002 'I'll be with you, whatever'  memo is very new. The last sentence is foreboding too.

While the words themselves are new, what they say very definitely isn't. Or don't you remember Blair threatening to resign if he didn't win the vote for war?

He put himself fully on the line for Bush - that was always clear - but that's a bit different to an unalterable commitment of UK forces.

[LJS]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Jeremy wouldn't ever be in the position to do so.

 

[Mr.Tease]

28 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

dammit, I I think I missed Corbyn savage Blair with a dry sponge at PMQs.

Or hasn't it happened yet?

Not happened yet, Cameron just doing his response. I don't expect a savaging but I do expect him to apologise 

[russycarps]

5 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Really ?  I certainly can...  I can certainly have seen William Hague and John Major (the other options of the time) having done exactly the same.  And I am 100% sure Thatcher would of done....

Ian Duncan Smith ?  Yes...
Cameron ?  Yes...
Ed Miliband? Yes....

Corybyn ?  No...

 

I'm not convinced. Blairs relationship with Bush was pathetic. Was thatcher an american lapdog? Her relationship with reagan was nothing like as lopsided. 

It wasnt in the british interest to go in to iraq. I think a lot of politicians would have realised that, especially thatcher

 

 

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Not happened yet, Cameron just doing his response. I don't expect a savaging but I do expect him to apologise 

Happening now. Like being savaged by a dry sponge.

Yep, it's definitely why the other MPs wanted him out. Not because he might attack blair, but because his attack is as dangerous as fluffy toy.

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, russycarps said:

I'm not convinced. Blairs relationship with Bush was pathetic. Was thatcher an american lapdog? Her relationship with reagan was nothing like as lopsided. 

It wasnt in the british interest to go in to iraq. I think a lot of politicians would have realised that, especially thatcher

Have you forgotten Thatcher's lapdog act for GW1?
(a memory refresh: she was in power when the troops were sent, but not by the time the action kicked off).

Do you remember that "ordinary Kuwaiti" who told the UN about babies being thrown out of incubators so the incubators could be taken to Iraq? Where that ordinary Kuwaiti was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador (but was never revealed until long afterwards, and the story was complete fabrication)?

This was the same Thatcher who was happily selling Saddam weapons until the USA told her to stop?

Etc, etc, etc.

[eFestivals]

so ... all the Corbyn fans have been made to look morons by Jezza himself.

The line that there was a plot to remove Corbyn because of what he'd say about Blair is now proven as false.

So it's back to the myth factory for a new line.

 

[eFestivals]

7 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

If he waited his whole life for that moment, it wasn't worth the wait...

He did give himself a nice pat on the back tho.

Awww, bless.

 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Is that it now...  Can he fuck off ?

I've just read something about more from Corbyn at 5pm, tho I've no idea if that's actually right.

But it quite possibly is, and quite possibly in front of a bunch of cheering no-thinkers where he'll get a free pass, rather than him have to 'suffer' the scrutiny of Parliament and the public.

[LJS]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

I've just read something about more from Corbyn at 5pm, tho I've no idea if that's actually right.

But it quite possibly is, and quite possibly in front of a bunch of cheering no-thinkers where he'll get a free pass, rather than him have to 'suffer' the scrutiny of Parliament and the public.

I thought his speech was reasoned & reasonable. I'm not quite sure what else was expected from him.

[LJS]

Just seen Hilary Benn who smugly has no regrets that Saddam Hussain was overthrown

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, LJS said:

I thought his speech was reasoned & reasonable. I'm not quite sure what else was expected from him.

Yep, I agree, his words were reasonable (tho his normal bumbling). He even had Cameron basically agree with what he said.

According the Jezuits, he was going to call for the indictment of Blair on war crime charges.

According to those same Jezuits, that was the very reason why "the Blairites" were trying to remove him from the leadership.

Remember that YouGov polling of new2 Labour members? Amongst other things it revealed they'd got an over-enthusiam for tin-foil hats, at over twice the UK average.

 

[eFestivals]

18 minutes ago, LJS said:

Just seen Hilary Benn who smugly has no regrets that Saddam Hussain was overthrown

on that particular point and nothing else, who disagrees?

I'd love to see every nutty leader overthrown, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the wise thing to do.

[russycarps]

57 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Have you forgotten Thatcher's lapdog act for GW1?
(a memory refresh: she was in power when the troops were sent, but not by the time the action kicked off).

Do you remember that "ordinary Kuwaiti" who told the UN about babies being thrown out of incubators so the incubators could be taken to Iraq? Where that ordinary Kuwaiti was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador (but was never revealed until long afterwards, and the story was complete fabrication)?

This was the same Thatcher who was happily selling Saddam weapons until the USA told her to stop?

Etc, etc, etc.

was she a lapdog then though? She bullied bush into war!

she was a liar and a warmonger, but not at the behest of america. She was never smitten with america like blair was. (maybe because britain still had some power back then, or the illusion of it anyway)

 

 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, russycarps said:

She bullied bush into war!

:Revisionism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

[LJS]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

on that particular point and nothing else, who disagrees?

I'd love to see every nutty leader overthrown, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the wise thing to do.

& it doesn't necessarily mean today is the best day to say it.

[russycarps]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

:Revisionism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

how so? didnt she ring bush up and tell him to pull himself together or something, when it looked like he was getting cold feet?

I must admit I havent even thought about GW1 in a decade or more so am a little hazy on the detail..

 

[krisskross]

37 minutes ago, LJS said:

Just seen Hilary Benn who smugly has no regrets that Saddam Hussain was overthrown

nice chap wasn't he.

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, krisskross said:

nice chap wasn't he.

I can scarcely believe I have to say that I am not expressing approval for Saddam Hussain, but since you have raised the above (& I have no idea if it is true)

Do you think his overthrow contributed to an increase or a reduction in terrorist incidents?

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-incidences-of-terrorism-worldwide-1968-2009

[pink_triangle]

I cant help but thinking this is a huge amount of taxpayers money spent to tell us what we already knew.

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, LJS said:

I can scarcely believe I have to say that I am not expressing approval for Saddam Hussain, but since you have raised the above (& I have no idea if it is true)

Do you think his overthrow contributed to an increase or a reduction in terrorist incidents?

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-incidences-of-terrorism-worldwide-1968-2009

the difficulty there is that when that thought process is followed thru, it ends up meaning letting people off murder just in case it might cause more murders.

I get where you're coming from because causing worse is the line I took at the time myself, but there's horrific follow-thru parts to both options, and there does have to be a line somewhere that's too much to be allowed without response.

Edited July 6, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

Trying to listen to Tony Blair but having trouble keeping my lunch down. He is re-writing history to wriggle off the hook. 

[LJS]

4 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Is he ?  Is he not allowed to have and explain his own thoughts and feelings...  I haven't heard any re-writing of history myself.  Just the situation from his view point.

He keeps talking about 9/11 which was nothing to do with Iraq & he keeps using the removal of Saddam Hussain as a justification for his actions  - we were specifically told that getting rid of Saddam Hussain was not the purpose of the invasion of Iraq.

[krisskross]

17 minutes ago, LJS said:

I can scarcely believe I have to say that I am not expressing approval for Saddam Hussain, but since you have raised the above (& I have no idea if it is true)

Do you think his overthrow contributed to an increase or a reduction in terrorist incidents?

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-incidences-of-terrorism-worldwide-1968-2009

You're just criticising someone for not regretting overthrowing him. It was a fucking disastrous war, and that was the one thing that was good to come out of it. Should we have gone to war? no. Would the US have gone to war without us? yes. Would that have changed anything. no.

Its hard to tell. Would the situation in North Africa, Syria etc be significantly better with a stable Iraq? Would Saddam be exerting as much pressure as Iran / Saudi Arabia are now in the middle east? Would Israel and Palestine still be fighting? There is no way of knowing exactly, but there would probably be less targeted at Europe. 

[eFestivals]

39 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

You can't talk about this stuff and the reasons for the actions taken without discussing the climate we was living in.  Don't be intentionally dumb.

Hmmm, there's some of that from you here too.

9/11 certainly created a new climate of fear, but in the UK that was absolutely nothing of the justification for Iraq. The US used and abused 9/11 and their population lapped it up, but there was nothing of that from this end of things and if Blair is trying to use it as justification for his own actions now (rather than merely as a pointer to US fears) he's talking shite.