By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Interesting again in his speech, about the need for the Liberals and Labour to form some form of Progressive Alliance, that the party needs rebooting from the top to bottom
Labour are missing a massive trick by totally ignoring him, as he is the only one that seems to cut straight through the rubbish and speak with such clarity on every issue - not hard to see why he was able to get elected and make real change to the country.
The underlying cause of Brexit is fundamentally a historical apathy and distrust of the EU from the outset - the constant negative media around the EU and what it does.
It was then a gamble by Cameron who, by his own admission, utterly called it wrong in terms of a referendum.
Where is Blairs hand in this?
I think Blair's mistake was allowing the freedom of movement straight away from the old Eastern Bloc countries - that fundamentally changed some Labour heartlands at a fast rate of pace.
I have recollections of the dossier claiming WMD and the unrealistic demands at the time of Hussain; demands he couldn't meet.
It was years ago and I've probably forgotten more than I can remember.
I'll read your link later though and remind myself.
Then there was of course the suicide of Kelly. All rather shady I know.
How much Blair was privy to at the time I don't know and how much was down to Intelligence. I thought the claim was the government was acting on information provided.
They literally took stuff off the internet and stole some essay an undergraduate wrote, to claim Iraq had WMDs that could wipe Europe out. They knew they were lying, and they did it so that there would be more demand globally and domestically, to go to war.
When asked to provide proper sources for all these claims in the Chilcot inquiry, they were claimed to not exist.
Brexit, the break up of the Union, an awful political and media class ... he wasted a massive opportunity to address many underlying issues in the UK but he just painted over them. All for party political power and a holy war, it now seems.
They should listen to what he says.
Every general election since Ipswich won the FA Cup
1979 Lost 1983 Lost 1987 Lost 1992 Lost 1997 Blair 2001 Blair 2005 Blair 2010 Lost 2015 Lost 2017 Lost 2019 Lost
They literally took stuff off the internet and stole some essay an undergraduate wrote, to claim Iraq had WMDs that could wipe Europe out. They knew they were lying, and they did it so that there would be more demand globally and domestically, to go to war.
When asked to provide proper sources for all these claims in the Chilcot inquiry, they were claimed to not exist.
The US were going in anyway.
To suggest there was any encouragement needed and that their determination was somehow influenced by the UK is simply not right.
The Sleeping Giant speech had long been made before any of this and, as I said, Blair shot over there to stall action. Which he did.
He said they needed to gather further evidence before taking action, but it could be that he knew what he was doing and the plan was to fabricate it if necessary all along.
Obviously I wasn't part of that discussion so can't help there.
To suggest there was any encouragement needed and that their determination was somehow influenced by the UK is simply not right.
The Sleeping Giant speech had long been made before any of this and, as I said, Blair shot over there to stall action. Which he did.
He said they needed to gather further evidence before taking action, but it could be that he knew what he was doing and the plan was to fabricate it if necessary all along.
Obviously I wasn't part of that discussion so can't help there.
Probably they were, but we clearly made it easier for them. We were lying about Iraq's military capability, and then Colin Powell directly quotes it. It was central at the time.
There is no way to excuse or even to minimise our role in the Iraq war. We were central to it at all times. The idea that Blair was ever the pacifist is ludicrous. If he wanted to stop it, he wouldn't have done the above, and ultimately there was absolutely nothing stopping him from not sending our forces in. The public were hugely against it but he did it anyway, because he wanted to.
Would the US have gone it alone without us? Yeah, probably, but we didn't need to and could have made it very hard for them (with us against in it in the UN, who knows?)
Every general election since Ipswich won the FA Cup
1979 Lost 1983 Lost 1987 Lost 1992 Lost 1997 Blair 2001 Blair 2005 Blair 2010 Lost 2015 Lost 2017 Lost 2019 Lost
Talking of disposable and shifting policies ... welcome!
I read that as the UK losing since 1979. Politically anyway. And sometimes just not losing as badly e.g. Blair is definitely better than BoJo and what he's walked into No.10 and all over the carpet.
At least the global economy has more often than not given us a boost. Without that we'd have been screwed so let's hope we don't make things unnecessarily difficult for ourselves ...
Probably they were, but we clearly made it easier for them. We were lying about Iraq's military capability, and then Colin Powell directly quotes it. It was central at the time.
There is no way to excuse or even to minimise our role in the Iraq war. We were central to it at all times. The idea that Blair was ever the pacifist is ludicrous. If he wanted to stop it, he wouldn't have done the above, and ultimately there was absolutely nothing stopping him from not sending our forces in. The public were hugely against it but he did it anyway, because he wanted to.
Would the US have gone it alone without us? Yeah, probably, but we didn't need to and could have made it very hard for them (with us against in it in the UN, who knows?)
I think I could agree with you until the cows come home and you'd still find some angle to disagree.
Yes, I know the public was against it - I was one of them. It cost the country dearly on top of everything else. And it's continued to cost us all ever since.
I've no interest in excusing any of it.
You seem quite keen to steer me into defending something that I don't wish to defend so I'll let you get on.
Talking of disposable and shifting policies ... welcome!
I read that as the UK losing since 1979. Politically anyway. And sometimes just not losing as badly e.g. Blair is definitely better than BoJo and what he's walked into No.10 and all over the carpet.
At least the global economy has more often than not given us a boost. Without that we'd have been screwed so let's hope we don't make things unnecessarily difficult for ourselves ...
His point is valid though surely?
You can't influence anything without power and just saying that a party should promote a style of politics and policy even if they can't implement it is a strange attitude to many.
It literally allows the policies you don't support to be implemented which is surely worse than some compromises to ones own policy?
I think I could agree with you until the cows come home and you'd still find some angle to disagree.
Yes, I know the public was against it - I was one of them. It cost the country dearly on top of everything else. And it's continued to cost us all ever since.
I've no interest in excusing any of it.
You seem quite keen to steer me into defending something that I don't wish to defend so I'll let you get on.
I've no interest in arguing for the sake of it, but you were saying that Blair was innocent at the point of us going to war which just isn't true.
You can't influence anything without power and just saying that a party should promote a style of politics and policy even if they can't implement it is a strange attitude to many.
It literally allows the policies you don't support to be implemented which is surely worse than some compromises to ones own policy?
SB
As I said, there is a balance and Blair is better than many of the alternatives before or since.
The whole problem is that he actually torpedoed a more progressive approach to British politics and society by compromising and failing to promote the policies that are needed to address the structural problems and inequalities in society. Brown at least held his hand up and admitted that recently.
Blair set a standard for a "progressive" electable politician that is entirely right in your eyes and entirely wrong in mine. And when his party was in power for 13 years that is a massive missed opportunity.
As I said, there is a balance and Blair is better than many of the alternatives before or since.
The whole problem is that he actually torpedoed a more progressive approach to British politics and society by compromising and failing to promote the policies that are needed to address the structural problems and inequalities in society. Brown at least held his hand up and admitted that recently.
Blair set a standard for a "progressive" electable politician that is entirely right in your eyes and entirely wrong in mine. And when his party was in power for 13 years that is a massive missed opportunity.
The whole point is they wouldn't have been in power for 13 years without those compromises. You are assuming things would have played out the same with regards to votes if there had been different policy decisions. That's a bold call given GB's timeline.
You're right, I think it's better to get even 25% towards your goal rather than 0% which is effectively what you're advocating and what has happened over the last 4 years of Labour.
It's achieved precisely nothing, in fact it's worse, it's enabled the Tories.
The whole point is they wouldn't have been in power for 13 years without those compromises. You are assuming things would have played out the same with regards to votes if there had been different policy decisions. That's a bold call given GB's timeline.
You're right, I think it's better to get even 25% towards your goal rather than 0% which is effectively what you're advocating and what has happened over the last 4 years of Labour.
It's achieved precisely nothing, in fact it's worse, it's enabled the Tories.
SB
We won't agree on this. But if we can look back and see things that should have been done or issues that have been allowed to worsen until they provoke a crisis like Brexit or Scotland on the verge of leaving the Union, then there's no actual proof that the approach of getting elected and rejecting socialism in the process has actually helped.
Remember what they say about keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different result?
We won't agree on this. But if we can look back and see things that should have been done or issues that have been allowed to worsen until they provoke a crisis like Brexit or Scotland on the verge of leaving the Union, then there's no actual proof that the approach of getting elected and rejecting socialism in the process has actually helped.
Remember what they say about keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different result?
Your last paragraph is particularly amusing considering your desire for Labour to carry on with the same approach which just saw them absolutely smashed at the ballot box...
Highlighting crass stupidity since sometime around 2010
Your last paragraph is particularly amusing considering your desire for Labour to carry on with the same approach which just saw them absolutely smashed at the ballot box...
Eh? It was an approach that saw them recover ground they'd been losing for the previous 10 years in 2017.
An approach that was so successful that Corbyn's opponents went nuclear throwing everything they could at him.
The big problem in 2019 was also it was more about Brexit. And that's been a fecked up discussion for a decade.
We won't agree on this. But if we can look back and see things that should have been done or issues that have been allowed to worsen until they provoke a crisis like Brexit or Scotland on the verge of leaving the Union, then there's no actual proof that the approach of getting elected and rejecting socialism in the process has actually helped.
Remember what they say about keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different result?
"Remember what they say about keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different result?"
Why doesn't this apply to your argument then?
Every time they have tried your approach they have lost. What do they say about doing the same thing and expecting a different result?
We aren't going to agree, you're right. I still think getting even a little bit of something done is better than never getting anything done.
Sorry if the deaths of hundreds of thousands sends you to sleep.
The hundreds of thousands that were slaughtered in Iraq before and after Gulf War 1? Not to mention who William Hague confessed supplied SH with the means?
"Remember what they say about keeping on doing the same thing and expecting a different result?"
Why doesn't this apply to your argument then?
Every time they have tried your approach they have lost. What do they say about doing the same thing and expecting a different result?
We aren't going to agree, you're right. I still think getting even a little bit of something done is better than never getting anything done.
SB
And I think painting over the cracks just causes more serious problems down the road. It's a false economy.
"Every time they have tried your approach they have lost." As my approach is to talk about policies for the greater good in an age where we've moved on from Thatcherism and understand that neoliberalism doesn't work as well as claimed, then I'd suggest my approach is very recent indeed.
The time has come for this discussion. Corbyn definitely got some traction with it in 2017 and then he paid the price. His legacy might be that the ammunition is now spent when Starmer or similar step up to talk about the same things.
Eh? It was an approach that saw them recover ground they'd been losing for the previous 10 years in 2017.
An approach that was so successful that Corbyn's opponents went nuclear throwing everything they could at him.
The big problem in 2019 was also it was more about Brexit. And that's been a fecked up discussion for a decade.
It was an approach that heartened and hardened the core left wing, but could never appeal to anyone else. It was an approach that was so 'successful' that it led to an unparalleled Tory majority.
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
And I think painting over the cracks just causes more serious problems down the road. It's a false economy.
"Every time they have tried your approach they have lost." As my approach is to talk about policies for the greater good in an age where we've moved on from Thatcherism and understand that neoliberalism doesn't work as well as claimed, then I'd suggest my approach is very recent indeed.
The time has come for this discussion. Corbyn definitely got some traction with it in 2017 and then he paid the price. His legacy might be that the ammunition is now spent when Starmer or similar step up to talk about the same things.
his legacy is boris in power.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
It was an approach that heartened and hardened the core left wing, but could never appeal to anyone else. It was an approach that was so 'successful' that it led to an unparalleled Tory majority.
Yes, dear.
Well, I for one hope we continue to see this more socialist (i.e. balanced with capitalism) approach promoted, discussed and eventually implemented. Until then I guess we'll just keep scratching our heads and keeping our fingers crossed that the environment, poverty, equality, health, happiness, wellbeing, trade, international cooperation, peace, the shift to automation and increasing AI will all sort itself out.
I'd like to look my daughters in the eye a few years down the line and say we didn't just decide to play politics instead and lost track of everything.
Well, I for one hope we continue to see this more socialist (i.e. balanced with capitalism) approach promoted, discussed and eventually implemented. Until then I guess we'll just keep scratching our heads and keeping our fingers crossed that the environment, poverty, equality, health, happiness, wellbeing, trade, international cooperation, peace, the shift to automation and increasing AI will all sort itself out.
I'd like to look my daughters in the eye a few years down the line and say we didn't just decide to play politics instead and lost track of everything.
Will that be when you are explaining to them why the Tories have ruined the country but it was better not to make some compromises at the time in the hope that the argument in it's entirety would be won and the all the policies implemented rather than a few?
I understand the ideological point and you are right to stick to that. It's just the practicalities that don't seem to be taken into account.
We can leave it there though (after your reply as we aren't going to agree as you've said).
Will that be when you are explaining to them why the Tories have ruined the country but it was better not to make some compromises at the time in the hope that the argument in it's entirety would be won and the all the policies implemented rather than a few?
I understand the ideological point and you are right to stick to that. It's just the practicalities that don't seem to be taken into account.
We can leave it there though (after your reply as we aren't going to agree as you've said).
SB
It's not ideological though, Stokie.
It's purely practical for me. What's ideological is pretending that politicians have the right answers or even people's best interests at heart when they're looking to get elected.
Policies are the only currency. And we're just wasting time and opportunities pretending otherwise and putting our faith in the game instead.
By any objective measure the UK political system is ridiculously unrepresentative and out of date. And our media is much worse, more untrustworthy and yet more actively involved in our democracy than it should be. Playing by those rules and winning that game gives us politicians and parties who are ultimately not up to the real job of government.
Appealing to voters on policy and factual debate to create the demand for more serious, thoughtful and real politics has to be the way forward. Playing the game on other people's terms is the big mistake and leads nowhere.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
