The movie that is going to land Tony Blair in jail

[Lord Bracknell]

Is it not a bit Ironic considering Galloway was good mates with Saddam Hussein who slaughtered tens of thousands of his own people ?

That allegation is complete tosh. Look at the video of Galloway's appearance before the senate committee and you'll learn how he won a libel action against The Daily Telegraph who published falsified stories about Galloway's relationships with the Saddam regime. You seem to be remembering the lies that were published to discredit Galloway, rather than the reality.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/jan/25/Iraqandthemedia.thedailytelegraph

 

[Machiavelli]

Achieving peace in Northern Ireland, decentralisation of power in Scotland and Wales, reinvestment in education and the NHS, introduction of national minimum wage, high employment,

Whatever side of the fence you sit on, he changed what we look for in a Prime Minister, he was resilient, he had charm, he was articulate - and in my opinion, he was a good Prime Minister.

Achieving peace in NI: I agree (see post 38)
Decentralisation: I also agree and failed to mention this in post 38
Reinvestment in education and the NHS: this was all PPP, PFI, and whatever acronym they fancied picking out, involving the racking up of more debt which we'll be paying off for decades to come; why not also mention the commodification of higher education?; why not also mention that he only spent the money on education because it was demanded by financiers, multinational corporations, and other dubious bodies that he now sits on their board?
Introduction of a national minimum wage: now what rate was that introduced at? He didn't think about a national maximum wage did he
High employment: granted, but this was coupled by comfortably the highest rates of unemployment in British history, which the ConDems have managed to substantially hike up subsequently
Resilient: in attacking unions, furthering the neoliberal project, and prosecuting wars
Charm and articulate: granted, but hardly deployed to good effect (see above)

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

That allegation is complete tosh. Look at the video of Galloway's appearance before the senate committee and you'll learn how he won a libel action against The Daily Telegraph who published falsified stories about Galloway's relationships with the Saddam regime. You seem to be remembering the lies that were published, rather than the reality.

Ah well Lord. I still don't like him !

 

[symyjym]

Tony Blair was fantastic for the country after decades of Conservative misery. Those late 90's were a triumph for this country and put us back on the map. It's unfortunate that he invaded Iraq illegaly, as Hussein's regime and him and his rapist, murdering entourage of backward ragheads needed taking out and was a perfectly legit reason to go in without the WMD questions.

I thought at the time he was elected he was a breath of fresh air, and the Kosovo war was justified. Unfortunately the success of that war gave him a false sense of security that America could do no wrong and every war would be perfect, the trouble was Bush wasn't Clinton and he had a personal vendeta with Saddam.

I think in the 21st century, if you claim to be an advanced nation, you have to lead by example, not be willing to go to war at the drop of a hat.

I don't think that the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives lost and devastation of the country’s infrastructure was ever worth one man.

We didn't seek alternative options at the time and war should always be the last resort if ever.

 

[Machiavelli]

Some fair points. I read an article interviewing some of the female victims of his regime. Much stuck with me but the one that hit me hardest was the lady who witnessed another female being thrown to Hussein's pack of dogs for refusing him sex.

What were the three points? I can't see them? Give them to me and I'll give it a bash.

Thanks for your courtesy and my argument has never been to defend Hussein. As for those three points, Symjym used them when he began this thread:
Killed the Labour party
Killed a million people
Made a killing

 

[Machiavelli]

I think the choice of word 'unfortunate' is a bit of an understatement and that's before your racist 'raghead' comments. OK there had been far too much indulgence of Saddam Hussein by the West but regime change was only achieved at the second attempt which allowed too many years of collateral damage to the civilian population.

As for the late 90's being a triumph for this country, that is putting a very rosy gloss on things. Yes Blair achieved a landslide rise to power - the public were ripe for change after the Tories lost the plot. Blair took full advantage of the vacuum left behind, and had a free hand knowing he would not face a proper challenge for several years. But we now know that Blair's 'Cool Britannia' feel good factor was largely based on deregulating the banks, credit fuelled spending and allowing the banks free rein. All compounded by the so called 'best Chancellor ever' in Gordon Brown - and we are still paying the price for that.

Key to the whole thing was Blair's brilliant manipulation of politics and the news via a ruthless and effective PR machine creating acres of spin, telling us it was all 'brilliant'.

This is just a different, perhaps better, way of what I've been saying

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

I thought at the time he was elected he was a breath of fresh air, and the Kosovo war was justified. Unfortunately the success of that war gave him a false sense of security that America could do no wrong and every war would be perfect, the trouble was Bush wasn't Clinton and he had a personal vendeta with Saddam.

I think in the 21st century, if you claim to be an advanced nation, you have to lead by example, not be willing to go to war at the drop of a hat.

I don't think that the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives lost and devastation of the country’s infrastructure was ever worth one man.

We didn't seek alternative options at the time and war should always be the last resort if ever.

I agree with most of that - a rational and fair view.

I wonder how history will really judge Blair - I guess it all depends on whether he is ever held to account and if he then persuades people that he acted in good faith.

 

[Nibble]

Thanks for your courtesy and my argument has never been to defend Hussein. As for those three points, Symjym used them when he began this thread:
Killed the Labour party
Killed a million people
Made a killing

Ah, apologies. Yes. Well One by one:

Killed The Labour Party: Hard to disagree with. Certainly made them unpopular enough to lose power.

Killed a million people: He certainly played a part in a large number of deaths, whether this was illegal or not has yet to be determined and I don't know the figures I'm afraid.

Made a killing: Undisputedly one of the highest earning ex-PM's the country has ever seen. Whether he made this from warmongering I don't know but he shouldn't be too worried about the winter fuel prices.

 

[symyjym]

Achieving peace in Northern Ireland, decentralisation of power in Scotland and Wales, reinvestment in education and the NHS, introduction of national minimum wage, high employment,

Whatever side of the fence you sit on, he changed what we look for in a Prime Minister, he was resilient, he had charm, he was articulate - and in my opinion, he was a good Prime Minister.

I thought John Major was a good PM and he did all the work on the Northern Ireland peace agreement.

 

[Don Quixote]

Surely Bush is the real war criminal here. The comparative size of British troops to American troops is overwhelmingly American. America did not need British help to invade Iraq, they only wanted Britain so it would look as if they had international backing.

 

[daveinprague]

I'm on my phone but what is Galloway charged with and why was he there and was he summond to congress?

'skeletons in his cupboard'....took the senate investigators to the absolute cleaners.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

Surely Bush is the real war criminal here. The comparative size of British troops to American troops is overwhelmingly American. America did not need British help to invade Iraq, they only wanted Britain so it would look as if they had international backing.

Exactly. Which all underlines why we could/should have said 'no' to the Americans, rather than meekly follow in their footsteps. That is why Blair's legacy is so tarnished - he did a lot of good things but when it came to probably the most humanitarian decision of his career he bottled it and looked to find a fudged justification for us going to war rather than let the Americans get on with their own dirty work. I guess it was his equivalent of a Falklands moment and he will have to live with that.

 

[Machiavelli]

Ah, apologies. Yes. Well One by one:

Killed The Labour Party: Hard to disagree with. Certainly made them unpopular enough to lose power.

Killed a million people: He certainly played a part in a large number of deaths, whether this was illegal or not has yet to be determined and I don't know the figures I'm afraid.

Made a killing: Undisputedly one of the highest earning ex-PM's the country has ever seen. Whether he made this from warmongering I don't know but he shouldn't be too worried about the winter fuel prices.

Three cheers: better go and do some work now

 

[geniarse]

the guys a ****

Blair or that Scottish ****?

Both in my opinion...

 

[Machiavelli]

Surely Bush is the real war criminal here. The comparative size of British troops to American troops is overwhelmingly American. America did not need British help to invade Iraq, they only wanted Britain so it would look as if they had international backing.

The difference being that Bush and his gang never signed up to the International Criminal Court (and, in UKip's terms, refused to surrender sovereignty), so there's no body to put him on trial. Blair, however, did (which is one of many other supra-national institutions that UKip fail to mention when banging on about the loss of British -- they mean English as the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish are not so dim to be taken in by their crypto-fascist nonsense). So that just leaves the question of why the ICC hasn't attempted to collar Blair. I'll leave that up to you to decide.

 

[Machiavelli]

There is absolutely no shred of doubt that Iraq was a better place under Saddam Hussein. Since his demise, the place has been hell on earth. Scores of innocent people being killed in bombings and shootings is still a weekly occurrence and has been for the last 10 years. Iraq has turned from being one of the most educated and progressive Middle Eastern nations to being a perpetuating warzone with no real future in sight - but it's reasonable to assume that is the real reason Blair intervened, to profit from this scenario.

Spot on Mustafa. If anyone wants to read about this try the relevant chapter of Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine. While you're at it, read the whole book, it'll improve your understanding of the world over the past forty years.

 

[symyjym]

I dislike Blair because he hides behind God.

Tony Blair Faith Foundation

I also dislike him for becoming Special Peace Envoy for the Middle East which is more about being a PR stunt to paint over his errors instead of admitting he got it wrong.

He only cares about how he is written in history whilst earning a fortune along the way.

Anyone remember this New Labour New Danger campaign. I guess we were all warned

 

[melias shoes]

I thought he was a good Prime Minister.

Well there you go.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

You've only got to look at Blairs record in the office and his friends....he was six years as Premier...took our country into conflict 5 times.
His special friends beside Bush.....Silvio Berlusconi...what happened to him? Nicolas Sarkozy ...what happened to him? ....Wanted to knight Bashar al Assad....wonder what he's up to now....Gaddafi of Libya....Blair is a leech of the highest order.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Can't stand either of them but Blair should be tried for war crimes.

If you're on the winning side in a conflict being indicted for war crimes is out of the question.