Indy Companion
Ashley Madison

Tony re-elected

luckydog71

New member
Oct 27, 2003
1,117
0
0
70
Washington State
Tony Blair was re-elected today. He was cut back from the huge majority he had, and naturally all the media is claiming it is because he was a strong ally of the USA.

Like last years presidential election, I am sure during the campaign his opposition claimed this was a referendum on the war. If true the Brits have spoken, and the silent majority have told the vocal minority to stuff it.

Congrats Tony on winning a majority, and thanks for all of your support.

It will be interesting to see how those politicians who decided not to support the Iraq invasion make out, when it is there turn. I guess Paul is next.
 

BushPilot

New member
Apr 23, 2004
390
0
0
The UK election was never a referendum on the war. The only other major party in the UK, the Conservatives, are even bigger supporters of the invasion of Iraq than the Labour party.
 

timec98

Banned
Mar 5, 2005
84
0
0
luckydog, go ahead, continue to reach --- why not ask yourself how many U.S. citizens currently support the U.S. occupation of Iraq?

As it stands the U.K. has, what, 8000 troops in Iraq - I'd call that symbolic, at best.

What percentage of Canadians do you think support your countries self serving interests in Iraq?

.
 

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,061
0
0
53
luckydog71 said:
Tony Blair was re-elected today. He was cut back from the huge majority he had, and naturally all the media is claiming it is because he was a strong ally of the USA.

Like last years presidential election, I am sure during the campaign his opposition claimed this was a referendum on the war. If true the Brits have spoken, and the silent majority have told the vocal minority to stuff it.

Congrats Tony on winning a majority, and thanks for all of your support.

It will be interesting to see how those politicians who decided not to support the Iraq invasion make out, when it is there turn. I guess Paul is next.

The short of it LD is Blair lied and it was exposed. There were no more WMD's in Iraq. There was never a 45-minute threat to the world from Iraq's WMD's. There was no connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida. Well other than the latter tried a few times to assassinate the former.

If the British election was an referendum on anything it was on the concept of the Third Way. The around 100 seat reduction of New Labour's majority to 61 and getting only 37% of the vote is a rebuke. The British are getting tired of Blair's policies. Going in Blair's favour is the voters are not yet sold on electing a Tory government.
 

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,061
0
0
53
timec98 said:
luckydog, go ahead, continue to reach --- why not ask yourself how many U.S. citizens currently support the U.S. occupation of Iraq?

As it stands the U.K. has, what, 8000 troops in Iraq - I'd call that symbolic, at best.

What percentage of Canadians do you think support your countries self serving interests in Iraq?

.

For starters I would say it's under 50%, and maybe under 40%.
 
Hey LD, you must be watching CNN, because the British press are certainly not putting the reduced majority soley down to the Iraq fiasco. Immigration and fiscal irregularities along with the usual tax, health and education were sited as well. Voter turnout was only 37%, it is becoming of significant concern that this figure is reducing with each camapign.

I voted by post and voted Lib Dem as they have a manifesto that is broad without being soley left or right. Was the Iraq campaign an issue for me? Yes, Tony misled the British public and didn't own up when he was rumbled. The latter is what pissed the electorate off, that and the feeling he's got his tongue up Bush's arse. The BBC have a program called Question Time where politicians are grilled (and I do mean grilled) by a randomly selected audience. The questions are not known to the panel before and it is BRUTAL, made even more so by the host not putting up with the politician being evasive.

For what it's worth, Tony will resign within two years and hand over to Gordon Brown
 
Labour or New Labour

Wolverine

Tony got the British public to vote for him because he represented 'New Labour' as opposed to the 'Old Labour' party, which was in the pocket of the Unions as the NDP. Blair has about 50 'hard line lefty old Labour' dissenters who are going to make this term difficult for him
 

timec98

Banned
Mar 5, 2005
84
0
0
timec98 said:
As it stands the U.K. has, what, 8000 troops in Iraq - I'd call that symbolic, at best
hifisex said:
Better effort than we (Canada) managed to put out.....and its NOT just symbolic. They are highly trained soldiers providing a very valuable service in assisting the rest of the coalition forces!

Coalition of the Coerced --- better known as the Incredible Shrinking Coalition

Of the original 3 dozen countries, 11 have already pulled out and 5 others have announced intentions to withdraw and of the remaining there’s an assortment of individual country troop reductions occurring. Other than the U.K. troops, that symbolic Coalition is made up of approximately 12,000 troops, a significant portion of those being non-combatants. Ya, ya, HFS – those well trained U.K. troops seem to be placed in less hostile areas of Iraq – why so?

.
 

Kev

New member
May 14, 2002
1,618
0
0
The smartest politician in Canada is John Chretien. Because he said fuck you America and your self-serving goverment. The UN can't even support what you want to do, why should we?
 

dittman

New member
Jan 22, 2003
730
0
0
71
seattle
dirtydan said:
The short of it LD is Blair lied and it was exposed. There were no more WMD's in Iraq. There was never a 45-minute threat to the world from Iraq's WMD's. There was no connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida. Well other than the latter tried a few times to assassinate the former.

actually blair like bush was exonerated by their parlimentry commision for either hyping or exaggerating the intelligence. What you liberals fail to comprehend even after quite a few commissions and reports is that the intelligence was wrong not only from the c.i.a. but from the whole world.
 

dittman

New member
Jan 22, 2003
730
0
0
71
seattle
Kev said:
The smartest politician in Canada is John Chretien. Because he said fuck you America and your self-serving goverment. The UN can't even support what you want to do, why should we?
kev id be more concerned about the federal liberals telling western canada to fuck themselves for years like they have been doing instead of them telling the u.s to fuck ourselves.
 

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,749
6
0
victoria
luckydog71 said:
If true the Brits have spoken, and the silent majority have told the vocal minority to stuff it.
The "silent majority" was 63%, who couldn't be bothered to vote, given their range of choice. Many of those who did vote Labour held their noses while writing their ballots, choosing what they considered the lesser of the available evils. The Conservative Party has been totally fragmented since Thatcher was booted out, and unable to present a credible alternative. All polls since the war started have shown a sizeable majority of Brits against their involvement. He was re-elected in spite of his support for the war in Iraq, not because of it.
 

luckydog71

New member
Oct 27, 2003
1,117
0
0
70
Washington State
Iraq war no longer a big issue

I agree with you guys. The Iraq war is no longer a big issue. And elections are no more about domestic affairs.

I wonder why that is????

I have my thoughts on this, but I am sure they would be at odds with most on the board.

Iraqiis are stepping up. The government is in place. The police are gaining strength and being trained. The terrorist insurgents are reduced to strapping bombs on themselves and killing a few dozen Iraqiis at a time.

Inside the US I think people now believe there were a few tactical mistakes made, but generally the war was well planned and well executed.

Outside of the US, people have tired of bashing the US and have decided to move on.

I still look forward to the day the majority of our troops come home. I will be the guy in front of the huge welcome home crowd waving the stars and stripes and cheering our guys until I am hoarse.
 

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,061
0
0
53
wolverine said:
Isn't Britain's Labour Party supposed to be the equivalent of Canada's NDP?
Supposed to be being the operative words. Under Tony Blair the party was re-created as New Labour and became centrist and in some cases centre-right. Blair's success in doing this is the reason why the Conservatives have lost the last three elections. Tony Blair is essentially John Major with a personality.
 

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,061
0
0
53
Bexhock said:
Wolverine

Tony got the British public to vote for him because he represented 'New Labour' as opposed to the 'Old Labour' party, which was in the pocket of the Unions as the NDP. Blair has about 50 'hard line lefty old Labour' dissenters who are going to make this term difficult for him
The NDP was created by the CCF and the Canadian Labour Congress.
 

dirtydan

Banned
Oct 7, 2004
1,061
0
0
53
luckydog71 said:
I agree with you guys. The Iraq war is no longer a big issue. And elections are no more about domestic affairs.

I wonder why that is????
In Britain that would because the Tories support the war effort. The issue was the trustworthiness of Tony Blair. The drop in popular vote and the loss of a great many seats, but still a Labour majority, is indicative that there is a lot of unhappiness with the PM.


luckydog71 said:
I have my thoughts on this, but I am sure they would be at odds with most on the board.

Iraqiis are stepping up. The government is in place. The police are gaining strength and being trained. The terrorist insurgents are reduced to strapping bombs on themselves and killing a few dozen Iraqiis at a time.
It seems to me the sucide bomber tactic has been used since insurgency began.


luckydog71 said:
Inside the US I think people now believe there were a few tactical mistakes made, but generally the war was well planned and well executed.

Oh LD, now that's a whitewash. The invasion and conquering of Iraq was very well planned. However the occupation was not.

luckydog71 said:
Outside of the US, people have tired of bashing the US and have decided to move on.
Indeed there are other issues just important as protesting a war blatantly designed on a couple of lies.


luckydog71 said:
I still look forward to the day the majority of our troops come home. I will be the guy in front of the huge welcome home crowd waving the stars and stripes and cheering our guys until I am hoarse.

No doubt the day US ends its occupation of Iraq will be a good one. Nowadays for one country to invade and another and conquer smacks of imperialist heydays of the 19th century.

However LD, if one of those returning soldiers asks you what they fought for, what are you going to answer? You can't tell them that it was to rid Iraq of WMD's because they were destroyed by the UN in the 1990's and I'm sure you wouldn't want to lie to a soldier. You can't tell them it was because Saddam Hussien was behind the terrorist attacks of 9/11 because that would also be a lie.

You could tell them it was rid a country of an evil dictator. But what if the soldier asks you then why didn't our government say that in the first place instead of months AFTER the president declared "mission accomplished". But the catch is LD, the soldier will be left wondering why did the war come first and the "reason" for it long after? :eek:
 

dittman

New member
Jan 22, 2003
730
0
0
71
seattle
However LD, if one of those returning soldiers asks you what they fought for, what are you going to answer? You can't tell them that it was to rid Iraq of WMD's because they were destroyed by the UN in the 1990's and I'm sure you wouldn't want to lie to a soldier. You can't tell them it was because Saddam Hussien was behind the terrorist attacks of 9/11 because that would also be a lie.

You could tell them it was rid a country of an evil dictator. But what if the soldier asks you then why didn't our government say that in the first place instead of months AFTER the president declared "mission accomplished". But the catch is LD, the soldier will be left wondering why did the war come first and the "reason" for it long after? :eek:[/QUOTE]

It is my personal opinion, because of past experiance that if you volunteer for something i.e joining the military you dont have the right to bitch, and i think most of themilitary think that way cause you dont hear about to many vets whineing and bithching, now that may change over time but right now you just hear a few acting like john kerry did when he returned from viet nam.
 

luckydog71

New member
Oct 27, 2003
1,117
0
0
70
Washington State
It is my opinion that it is us that have the distorted view of what is happening in Iraq. All of our information comes from the media.

I believe most people serving in Iraq get a daily reminder of why they are there. Not why the politicians sent them, but why they are there and why they want to stay and finish their job. They see the good they are doing for the citizens of Iraq every day. By far the majority of Iraq is under control. Iraqiis are taking over their own security. It will take a while but they are headed in the right direction.

Regularly there are graves uncovered that contain the remains of Sadam's victims.

I mentioned in an earlier post, I had the privilege of talking with 2 solders returning to Iraq after their R&R. We met in the bar at an airport. These guys heard the media talking and they said it was distorted.

All of the above is just my opinion. I have no great insight into what is going on. But when I have the opportunity to talk to 2 guys who are laying their life on the line, I find them more believable than a news reader sitting in Toronto or New York City.

There are many Americans who have a different opinion than mine. But we all share the same opinion when it comes to our troops. They deserve to come home with honor, they deserve a heroes welcome, and they deserve our best efforts to make them as whole as it is possible to do, given what they had to endure.

It is my uneducated guess that the majority of our troops will be home before W’s term of office is up. If for no other reason than the Republican presidential candidate will not have a hope in hell if they are not.