|
Post by OldGit on Apr 25, 2005 13:01:45 GMT 1
There's a lot of speculation that voters will use the election as a kind of referendum on Blair and his decision to got to war in Iraq. Will it influence your vote?
Personally, I think Blair got it very wrong and had to decide whether to fudge the issue and back Bush, or to stand his ground and wait for the UN to give a proper Resolution supporting Military action. The pressure to act was increased by the fact that any Military action had to take place before the height of summer as it would have become massively more difficult for troops and machinery to operate. In my opinion Blair over-ruled his cabinet and pressurised the Attorney General to sanction the war. Robin Cook, Claire Short and a number of eminent legal experts all are convinced this is the case.
Whether it has been "morally right" now that we know there are no WMD, is not the issue. It is totally illegal in International Law to go to war on the basis of changing a Regime. Blair lied and I think it should be a major consideration to everyone when they cast their vote on 05/05/05.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2005 13:16:45 GMT 1
Despite the outrage from some surrounding the subject at the time, I don't think it's going to have that big of an effect on the election result.
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 25, 2005 13:20:14 GMT 1
Not so sure Ant - I suspect that there is a skeleton in a cupboard that someone will find just too tempting to leave covered up. If the Attorney General's official statement to the Cabinet gets into the hands of the Media, it could rock more than a few boats. If Blair did lean on him to change his position, he'd have to resign.
|
|
|
Post by El Huracán!!!! on Apr 25, 2005 13:23:11 GMT 1
No effect on the way i will vote!!
|
|
|
Post by oranjemob 1 on Apr 25, 2005 13:23:17 GMT 1
I can only agree to all of the above. Blair stated, on the eve of the war, that Saddam could remain in power if he complied with U.N resolutions to disarm. He was, therefore, not advocating regime change as a reason to invade (because that would have been illegal). We all now know that Saddam had already complied and WMD did not exist. The September dossier WAS 'dodgy', Alisair Campbell is as guilty of the death of David Kelly, as if he'd actually used the knife himself (and is back by Blairs side for the election), Burma, Zimbabwe and countless other despotic regimes are still murdering and torturing their citizens with impunity, and Blair say's "the world is a better place without Saddam. Agreed, but that, you moron, WAS NOT THE REASON YOU SAID WE WERE GOING TO WAR Toiny Blair is either a liar or is incompetent. In either case he has forfitted the right to lead this country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2005 13:23:31 GMT 1
It's not going to happen though is it owd lad? Blair to win the next election by a convincing margin then to step down at some point during his next term in office and to be seen as one of the most successful PMs in the country's history is the more likely outcome.
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 25, 2005 13:27:15 GMT 1
As has been said many times
" a week is a long time in Politics"
|
|
|
Post by rob on Apr 25, 2005 13:28:16 GMT 1
I'm mildly alarmed by the cabinet. If they disagree with decisions, fair enough they do so behind closed doors. What they don't do is come out all guns blazing and attempt to shoot down their fellow cabinet ministers and leader of their government. There will be a number of people who will not vote Labour for the simple fact they are dissillusioned with Tony Blair over Iraq. However many will put aside their grievences and vote, especially if they are voting in a marginal constituency. There is also a possibility that many labour seats in student constituencies could be swing to the Lib Dems, with the help of the student populations (should they a) have sorted out their registration and b) can be bothered to vote) The issues of the Iraq war and Student loand s will be up near the top of many students election priorities, you can also add the hunting ban to that list for agricultural students, but I guess they'd vote Conservative. I would immagine that labour have more than a big enough majority to come through this election having only lost a few constituencies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2005 13:29:22 GMT 1
I'm mildly alarmed by the cabinet. If they disagree with decisions, fair enough they do so behind closed doors. What they don't do is come out all guns blazing and attempt to shoot down their fellow cabinet ministers and leader of their government. There will be a number of people who will not vote Labour for the simple fact they are dissillusioned with Tony Blair over Iraq. However many will put aside their grievences and vote, especially if they are voting in a marginal constituency. There is also a possibility that many labour seats in student constituencies could be swing to the Lib Dems, with the help of the student populations (should they a) have sorted out their registration and b) can be bothered to vote) The issues of the Iraq war and Student loand s will be up near the top of many students election priorities, you can also add the hunting ban to that list for agricultural students, but I guess they'd vote Conservative. I would immagine that labour have more than a big enough majority to come through this election having only lost a few constituencies. As you have pointed out, the problem with the student vote is that most of them don't bother voting!
|
|
|
Post by El Huracán!!!! on Apr 25, 2005 13:30:47 GMT 1
As you have pointed out, the problem with the student vote is that most of them don't bother voting! They dont bother doing much at all really Do at as a phone vote on Primetime Sat night TV and bang - you will get your voter number up straight away!!!
|
|
|
Post by rob on Apr 25, 2005 13:33:09 GMT 1
I wouldn't argue that Saddam had complied to UN resolutions.
He was still selling oil illegally.
He was undoubtedly trying to cover up the fact that he didnt at that time posses and WMD.
He was preventing UN inspectors from carrying out their job free of interference from his government officials, this also includes preventing them from looking and searching in such places as his palaces and other places.
I do bleieve that had Saddam been left in power, as things were he would have aquired WMD.
Thats the problem the Lib Dems face-trying to mobilize the student vote and get them worked up enough to vote
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Apr 25, 2005 13:38:23 GMT 1
Iraq won't decide the election
1) we won
2) it is hardly front page news now
3) the tories would have gone to war
4) As a general rule only really give a toss about ourselves, hence we only really vote on the issues that matter to our individual situation
5) few people really understand the major issues anyway, most of us just vote for people we like like the look or sound of - it is essentially a big personality contest, and that is where Blair will win hands down. he may not be as popular as he was, but as a modern day politician and the first president of the United Kingdom he is untouchable
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Apr 25, 2005 13:40:40 GMT 1
Having served in Iraq I believe the war was illegal and British lives (friends) have been lost because a man lied.
Fact.
|
|
|
Post by rob on Apr 25, 2005 13:41:51 GMT 1
we won??? I wouldn't say we've won, the war is still being waged...
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Apr 25, 2005 13:46:09 GMT 1
we won??? I wouldn't say we've won, the war is still being waged... We removed Saddam from power and they ahve since held elections and are in the process of building a new democratic government The insurgency that is going on is similar to terrorism in many parts of the world The war is won, the political systems are being changed, the troops are slowly but surely coming home and then Iraq will have to fend for itself the horrible bomb attacks and stuff are terrible and life for the average Iraqi is still worse than before the war, but there is no way saddam or his party could restore their power so although bits of fighting still occur the war itself has been won Having said all that I still don;t think we should have attacked a nation state without the full backing of the U.N.
|
|
|
Post by rob on Apr 25, 2005 13:52:29 GMT 1
No way???
Neither the US or the Brittish have commited the sorts of numbers to the war that are required to defeat the insurgents.
Elections may have been held, but on an almost daily basis there are assination attempts on members of the interim government and most notably the president.
You are right, the troops are slowly being withdrawn and coming out, thsi doesnt signigy i victory, to me this signifies bailing so as to avoid a viet cong like resistance over many years incurring many more human loss, continued wastage of money and resulting in administration change.
The war will only have been won once troops are completely removed from Iraq and the vast majority of insurgents have been defeated.
As things stand there are still large no go areas and plenty of insurgents prepared to kill beaurocratic officials, police etc. Remove the troops and I suspect the state would collapse into something resembleing a post colonial third world African state....
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Apr 25, 2005 13:55:56 GMT 1
The purpose of the war was to remove saddam - they did that
internal security within Iraq will be the responsibility of its new government
There is always a hell of a mess left behind after a period of war
The objective of the war is complete in the eyes of the governments of the uS and UK. They believe the instability in Iraq can be overcome by strong government
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Apr 25, 2005 13:56:41 GMT 1
How many people have spoken to an Iraqi and asked thier thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Apr 25, 2005 13:58:58 GMT 1
How many people have spoken to an Iraqi and asked thier thoughts? Several million of them voted despite the threat of death from extremists that is a sure sign they value the democracy they now have
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Apr 25, 2005 14:00:47 GMT 1
Several million of them voted despite the threat of death from extremists that is a sure sign they value the democracy they now have sorry I mean't how many of us have spoken aboutthe war to an iraqi?
|
|
|
Post by rob on Apr 25, 2005 14:07:47 GMT 1
I have, to a couple. undoubtedly they are thrilled Saddam has been removed, after all it is because of the persecution they recieved at his hands that they have left well paid jobs, with decent qualifications to work the night shift in a pie factory in market drayton for £7 a hour.
Having said that, despite wanting to go back to Iraq, they do not deem the place anywhere near being safe enough to travel back to and start living again...
However there is more to fighting a war than just removing a head of state and all of the corrupt beauocratic structures left in place.
We fought the war with little or no regard or plan as to how we were going to get Iraq back on its feet. What we were going to do after Saddam had been removed. Fundamental failures in the government and military strategies.
As a result I refuse to deem this war a sucess untill British and US troops are replaced by a UN peace keeping force, some sense of stability and peace has broken out and we can leave the country reasonably secure in the knowledge that the place isnt going to implode into civil war.
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Apr 25, 2005 14:34:54 GMT 1
well it took only 25+ years to get anywhere with the IRA so I guess there is a long way to go yet, and they were/are on our doorstep. There is the financial view, if we hadn't of supported the USA I wonder that the financial complications would have been? The us people dumped all things French and German big style, I wonder how much it would have affected us? it does always come down to money in the end doesn't it, however cold and heartless it seems. I doubt that our iraqi neighbour would ever go back, there is no one there to go back too other than a few friends.
|
|
|
Post by blue 44 on Apr 25, 2005 14:52:33 GMT 1
It's not going to happen though is it owd lad? Blair to win the next election by a convincing margin then to step down at some point during his next term in office and to be seen as one of the most successful PMs in the country's history is the more likely outcome. Blair to win comfortably no doubt at all Though I doubt history will be askind to him as you suggest
|
|
|
Post by oranjemob1 on Apr 25, 2005 17:15:31 GMT 1
The purpose of the war was to remove saddam - they did that /quote] Really Throb In that case the war was illegal, and Blair did lie, because he was quoted on many occasions as saying tha regime change was NOT the reason for war, but that Saddam presented a "clear and present danger" to Britain and British interests.
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Apr 25, 2005 17:39:50 GMT 1
" a week is a long time in Politics" its even longer when your in the vacinity of a black hole. No, it will not affect the way i vote. In honesty, to me it just shows the desperation of the Tories, that after lord knows how many inquiries, the Tories still want to use this as a means of gaining votes. No big flurry of activity regarding thier new health policies, or crime or education or tax, lets instead rake the dirt and try and discredit Tony Blair. Nobody is listening with regards conservative policies, their bollox and they know it.
|
|
DaveP200
Shropshire County League
Posts: 75
|
Post by DaveP200 on Apr 25, 2005 18:44:23 GMT 1
As you have pointed out, the problem with the student vote is that most of them don't bother voting! And I bet those that don't bother voting are the one's that constantly moaning about top up fee's and student loan's.
|
|
DaveP200
Shropshire County League
Posts: 75
|
Post by DaveP200 on Apr 25, 2005 18:47:36 GMT 1
Well I will vote the same way that I always do and that is for Labour. Then look forward to the day that the tory that is the PM stands down and Mr Brown takes over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2005 18:49:27 GMT 1
And I bet those that don't bother voting are the one's that constantly moaning about top up fee's and student loan's. Myself and the four other students in my hosue will be off to vote in the general election. We may all be voting for varying parties but we all believe that voting in elections should be compulsorary as well (as long as there was an abstain option).
|
|
|
Post by CuyahogaBlue on Apr 25, 2005 18:56:31 GMT 1
(as long as there was an abstain option). What if, and it's a big if, the Abstain option actually won? If abstain won with say 35% of the vote, what about the 65% who voted for a candidate? Who would represen them? I like the idea of registering a protest/disgust/noone vote, but what if it won
|
|
|
Post by skunkie on Apr 25, 2005 19:02:47 GMT 1
I think the Iraq war will be in the mind of some of the voters at election time.I hate all dictators wether their country is wealthy in oil or not.The Americans did not help in Yugoslavia neither in Burma or some parts of Africa.Freedom in elections means free choice,even if the elected party is hated by other countries in the world.As for Blair,he has stood by his decision on Iraq,i thought it was the Arab nations that should of sorted Saddam out myself.
|
|