Blair...

Remove all ads!

Looks like he's finally getting forced out.

Can you say 'Wooo!'

 

From where I'm standing (on the opposite side of the world from where he rules) he seemed, in general, a very reasonable, level headed person. Until he became Bush's lapdog. If it weren''t for that point, I would be very surprised if the replacement measured up anywhere near his standards. But then in saying that, I'm not very knowledgable on UK politics

 

Every politician falls out of favour sooner or later. It's just Tony Blair's turn now.

 

Everybody will love him again in about 15 years time (or if he dies). That seems to be the way of things. Look at how popular Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton are now, never mind the idol like status that John Kennedy has.

 

It's always the way of things HB. I dare say 5 years, not 15 for Blair. All things considered I agree with Rotku. Then again, is being the lapdog of the US a good decision or a bad one? You could make an enemy of the world but as long as the US is your friend it doesn't matter.

 

It certainly does matter if it looses you the vote back home.

 

I'm talking from the country's perspective, not Blair's

If parlimentarians weren't afraid of being voted out of office (as in if they were voted out they wouldn't care so much, and go back to doing whatever it was they did before being a parlimentarian... eating kittens or whatever) they could push forward those unpopular yet brilliant policies most countries need.

Staying in office doesn't mean always making the right decisions, it means always making the most popular ones.

 

When Blair started, he was anti-conservative, wanted to stand up for the minorities, improve womens rights and things like that. Somehow he just changed overnight and comes out with comments such as "I also don't believe that homosexuals should get married" (echoing Bu$h). Do we really want someone that runs the UK based on his or her religious beliefs?

From a N.Irish point of view, he has released Republic and and Unionist thugs from prison early to terrorize their neighbourhoods again, and he is hell bent on giving all of our natural resources to foreign companies. The water service, our docks and Lough Neigh belong to N.Ireland, not to the highest bidder!

Bring back John Major, all is forgiven!

[ Or Maggie Thatcher while we're at it! ] - Beren

[ September 11, 2006, 09:06: Message edited by: Beren ]

 

But aren't the popular ones the right ones in democracy? If we wanted otherwise we would have an oligarchy or a monarcy or some sort, where the masses don't vote.

 

The popular decisions CAN be the right decisions but often they are not. I stand by the idea that most people don't know how to run a country, they don't know what is required and they only care about being able to afford to pay all their bills.

Most people need to be led to the correct decision when it comes to running a country and sometimes a country needs to be very harsh to make sure that the goals of the country are met.

Give somebody enough rope and they'll hang themsleves. Make life too easy for people and they become complacent. Grant people a few more rights and they'll abuse at least one of them before the year is ended.

 

That's exactly my point!

 

Britain under Blair by Bill Bailey

Yay! We're rubbish!

 

I have to admit, Tony Blair was a big part of why I supported the Iraq war in the beginning. He had the credibility that George Bush lacked, in my view. I think this was the case with a lot of Americans at the time. It really is too bad he let the Bush Administration have their way with him. Who knows where we'd be today had he only had the balls to be the voice of reason. That said, it does make you wonder if the Bush administration twisted his arm to get his support, and what they used for leverage. Because when you think about it, Britain had very little to gain by the campaign. Blair had to have known that even in Iraq was a complete success, Bush would have taken all the credit anyway. It can certainly be argued that Britain's recent Islamic terrorism problems are a result of Blair's involvement with Bush...

 

You're kidding, right?
I mean, yes, he is a better liar than Bush - he at least TRIES to come up with excuses, no matter how lame they are (and boy were they lame). But credible? There's several scandals that have come up against him, including (surprise surprise - not) that he fabricated (yet another) story about WMDs in Iraq. Not to mention that one of his close allies (Ian Blair - no relation) is involved in more cover-ups and outright withdrawing of evidence (including but not limited to the de Menezes affair) than I care to count. That's really not my definiation of credible. And for the record, his pro-American stance (to the point of blindly going for whatever Washington wants without a second's thought for Britain) dates as far back 1997, the year he became Prime Minister.

 

You mean: Do we (you) really want someone that runs UK based on Bush's religious beliefs?

And as to a non-sarcastic/cynical response, I would say America needs to ask the same question...

 

I thought the justification for removing Saddam from power was that he ran a country based on horrible religious beliefs... oh the irony.

Hey! China! Time to invade that horrible fundamentalist country known as the United States of America!

 

From what I heard Blair is quite a religious person himself. Although nothing strong enough to have kept him from pretensions of sincerity, evidently.

Around here it is upheld that Hussein regarded al-Qaeda (or other groups with a religious impetus) as a threat to his regime. If it werent for the oil of Iraq he might have ended up as an ally of the US - again. Who's to say. Instead of Pakistan, which is a veritable breeding ground for terrorism and, apparently, has done so much to spread WMDs in recent years. Now that Iraq has been turned into a big training facility for terrorists, US vendettas lead to Iran, not Pakistan. It's all rather amusing, I think.

 

I recently heard Blair in Lebanon and frankly I can't help but respect the man. He's a brilliant public speaker, charismatic and nobody could call him stupid.

I just think its a shame that he will lose out because of the whole Middle-East thing when in everything else he seems to be a very good PM.