|
Post by pawlo on Apr 27, 2005 18:24:23 GMT 1
Just been watching a report on Channel 4 News about the governments legal advice on the legality of war with Iraq. Evidence seems pretty damning and in honesty, no matter how much I want to defend Tony B and the Party, in honesty, on this subject at least, I cant.
My hands are up chaps, it seems I was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Apr 27, 2005 18:26:46 GMT 1
What was said?
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 27, 2005 18:29:20 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2005 18:32:47 GMT 1
Whilst Tony Blair is head of the Labour party they will never ever get my vote.
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 27, 2005 18:33:53 GMT 1
Well, you might get the chance to vote for a "Blairless" Labour before you think!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2005 18:39:24 GMT 1
It takes a big man to admit they were wrong Pab
|
|
|
Post by john on Apr 27, 2005 18:49:54 GMT 1
Tony Blair will win the election, Tony Blair will as stated step down as PM and will be no doubt replaced by Gordon Brown.
So in your eyes people do you honestly honestly believe either Michael Howard or Charles Kennedy are the better option?
Howard where eveything he says is "attack attack attack" or Kennedy who wants to remove the Council Tax but doesnt really know were the 11billion needed to do so is going to come from.
under the Tories we would of gone to war anyway, that barsteward Saddam needed removing. Talk to a chap across the road from us, An Iraqi named munza and ask his opinions.
|
|
|
Post by oranjemob 1 on Apr 27, 2005 18:54:04 GMT 1
Just been watching a report on Channel 4 News about the governments legal advice on the legality of war with Iraq. Evidence seems pretty damning and in honesty, no matter how much I want to defend Tony B and the Party, in honesty, on this subject at least, I cant. My hands are up chaps, it seems I was wrong. You, Sir, are a gentleman. And one with dignity and courage. I take my hat off to you
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 27, 2005 18:56:02 GMT 1
JP
Are you saying that the fact Blair lied, us into an illegal war and may have exposed our troops to prosecution - let alone the death that has befallen so many, is something to be proud of?
Blair must resign - surely?
|
|
|
Post by john on Apr 27, 2005 19:07:34 GMT 1
JP Are you saying that the fact Blair lied, us into an illegal war and may have exposed our troops to prosecution - let alone the death that has befallen so many, is something to be proud of? Blair must resign - surely? I'm not voting for Blair, i'm voting for Labour. Labour policies, Iraq can't be changed, its happened. If the proof is really there that Blair lied, then its a war crimes tribunal and nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by rob on Apr 27, 2005 21:05:12 GMT 1
then surely they apply to America.
After all if the war is illegal for Britain the same must be true of the US,, or do they have a policy (cant remember) whereby their troops and politicians/citizens cant be prosecuted or tried for war crimes in the Hague?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2005 21:16:24 GMT 1
Iraq can't be changed, its happened. The Tories 18 years in office has been and gone yet it is used in reference nearly every time someone talks about voting Tory. Why should we sweep the Iraq war under the rug when it has caused so much bloodshed and was based on a trail of lies?
|
|
|
Post by aleix on Apr 27, 2005 21:22:41 GMT 1
Ever thought that if the Tories had been in power they would probably have gone to war as well? Gulf War? under which govt was that? And with their "tolerant" policy on foreigners it does make you think. Howard is using the war as a weapon in his campaign, and he's doing what he should do, but I'm 99% sure they would have gone to war as well.
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Apr 27, 2005 21:29:55 GMT 1
If the proof is really there that Blair lied, then its a war crimes tribunal and nothing less. Hello adopted cockney geezer ;D How can the above be sweeping it under the carpet If its true then get the room ready for Tony Blair at the Hague.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2005 21:33:07 GMT 1
Hello adopted cockney geezer ;D How can the above be sweeping it under the carpet If its true then get the room ready for Tony Blair at the Hague. Now now, I live in west London - far, far away from the Cockneys ;D
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Apr 27, 2005 21:34:59 GMT 1
Now now, I live in west London - far, far away from the Cockneys ;D You sure you can't hear them bow bells ;D
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Apr 27, 2005 21:44:09 GMT 1
Having watched BBC news I don't think its as clear cut as Blair lying. Goldsmith produced a paper which covered both sides of the legal argument for and against the war which most cabinet minster do. Then when 10 days later he had to make a decision he decided the war was legal. Goldsmith has confirmed this tonight. So Pab I think you now have to admit that you were wrong to say that you were wrong
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 27, 2005 21:49:07 GMT 1
Ever thought that if the Tories had been in power they would probably have gone to war as well? Gulf War? under which govt was that? And with their "tolerant" policy on foreigners it does make you think. Howard is using the war as a weapon in his campaign, and he's doing what he should do, but I'm 99% sure they would have gone to war as well. The Gulf War was a response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, and was legitimised by the UN, somewhat at odds with the invasion of Iraq Sovereign Territory in 2003.
|
|
|
Post by meoleshrew2 on Apr 27, 2005 21:51:48 GMT 1
Having watched BBC news I don't think its as clear cut as Blair lying. Goldsmith produced a paper which covered both sides of the legal argument for and against the war which most cabinet minster do. Then when 10 days later he had to make a decision he decided the war was legal. Goldsmith has confirmed this tonight. So Pab I think you now have to admit that you were wrong to say that you were wrong Thats how I read it on the BBC website, confused as much as ever now Now perhaps if its legal TB(cough) could produce the info, after all if its all legal wouldn't it be the trump card Still Voting Labour.
|
|
|
Post by Trev on Apr 27, 2005 21:51:50 GMT 1
How is it that an entire war is made legal just because some relic of a judge decides it is?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2005 22:08:44 GMT 1
Blair stated that Goldsmith did not change his mind between 7th and 17th.
He's lied big time. No doubts about it. Media being very careful with their choice of words for obvious reasons.
I don't think this changes peoples votes though.
Although it is clearly a scandal.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Apr 27, 2005 22:33:28 GMT 1
I assume this is the relevant report on the BBC website: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4491105.stmAs Goldsmith uses the word "opinion" he is not just baldly stating two opposing points of view. However nor is he saying that going ahead was illegal without another resolution. What he does seem to be saying - in a typical barrister's fashion is that the scales are tipped by a weighing-up of the considerations and his sifting of the considerations is that if the weapons inspectors' views were decisive then the scales tip in favour of kicking off without a second resolution. My recollection was that Blair talked up the weapons inspectors' report as much as he could to put that "tipping of the scales" spin onto it. Whereas the weapons inspectors were saying there was progress and they wanted more time and resources. Whether the war was legal or illegal it was wrong. However it has been fought. How this plays for the general election for me is I think the bloke is far too self-regarding to be trusted with the delicate checks and balances of an unwritten constitution in preserving democratic freedoms of the ordinary individual in this country. Out of a self-possessed urge to do good the power which he is given every four years will incremently move us further towards a society with less freedom, with more surveillance and a larger State as the prescribed palliative to the de-estabilising effects of globalisation. When the economy dips into recession - as it visibly will within 2 years the wheels will fall off for Labour - because then people cannot be bought off with ecomomic growth.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Apr 28, 2005 8:21:01 GMT 1
Sister Pab I admire your integrity.
Sean of Broseley I agree with every word.
|
|
|
Post by kickinpretty on Apr 28, 2005 8:41:00 GMT 1
SisterPab you do not have to apologise, the people eho need to apologise are the reporters and politicians that are creating something out of nothing.
As a previous poster has said, the attorney general had to make the case for both sides of the argument and then make a decision on what those arguments indicated, he came down on the side of war, others may take a different view but Tony Blair made his decision to go to war on the basis that it was legal to do so.
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on Apr 28, 2005 8:54:21 GMT 1
There is still the unanswered question regarding how the AG shifted his opinion between 7th and 17th March, and to what extent Blair forced his hand. I recommend that we all await tonight's Question Time for an insight into all 3 Leader's views
|
|
|
Post by True_Shrew on Apr 28, 2005 9:40:43 GMT 1
Takes a big man to do that Pab
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 28, 2005 9:43:55 GMT 1
There is still the unanswered question regarding how the AG shifted his opinion between 7th and 17th March, and to what extent Blair forced his hand. I recommend that we all await tonight's Question Time for an insight into all 3 Leader's views After what we now know about the original dossier I've no doubt that the AG was pressured some way or another to provide the advise that Blair wanted...simple as...
|
|