This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
Conservatives should have thought before voting for War in Iraq
Published on October 11, 2004 By Bahu Virupaksha In Politics
The UK is a parliamentary democracy, but under Blair it has becme more Presidential than parliamentary. This means that instead of the House of Commons playing a role in deciding the major issues of the day, the PM's personal staff and the unelected body of advisors play a major role in policy formulation. The failure of this model of decision making is found in the run up to the Iraq War. Instead of consulting his political colleagues Tony Blair had false intelligence reports selectively leaked to the press making rational decision making next to impossible. Further, when one brave heart leaked the information that the reports dealing with Iraq's WMD are "sexed up", the man was driven to suicide. The Hutton Inquiry essentially covered up the scandal and Blair escaped scott free. At least in the USA George II is being attacked and questioned for his decision tom go to war.
The political troubles of Blair do not mean that the Tories will gain.. In a fit of racist arrogance they stood up to be counted behind the likes of Blair and voted for war, at a time when nearly a third of the Labour Party revolted aginst the leadership of Blair. Robin Cook the Forign Minister even resigned. The Tories have failed the Nation, and hence may not gain in the next elections.

Comments
on Oct 11, 2004
How Blair gets away with accepting a ministers resignation for accidently misleading the house one year and then the next year thinks nothing of misleading the house himself. That's the major difference between parliamentary and presidential democracy, accountability. Blair no longer feels that he must be accountable and I for one will not vote for him because of it.

Paul.
on Oct 11, 2004
I agree with you by and large. In fact, I do not see this issue of WMD as noe of just misleading the House. Busn and Blair set out to create a pretext for war using the fear of weapons of mass destruction. They knew and the world knew the Saddam was telling the truth when he said that Iraq did not possess such weapons. For waging war against humanity and for being responsible for the death of nearly 100,000 Iraqi civillians Blair must be tried as a War Criminal and like the Nuremberg criminals hanged for his complicity in the War.
on Oct 11, 2004
Reply #2 By: Bahu Virupaksha - 10/11/2004 11:44:25 PM
I agree with you by and large. In fact, I do not see this issue of WMD as noe of just misleading the House. Busn and Blair set out to create a pretext for war using the fear of weapons of mass destruction. They knew and the world knew the Saddam was telling the truth when he said that Iraq did not possess such weapons. For waging war against humanity and for being responsible for the death of nearly 100,000 Iraqi civillians Blair must be tried as a War Criminal and like the Nuremberg criminals hanged for his complicity in the War.


Actually your wrong. You need to read a little more. Try this: Link

on Oct 12, 2004
Iraq did not possess such weapons


this statement is correct. Why do you believe it is wrong, or was it a different part of his response that you believed was wrong? Nothing in your link contradicts anything in Bahu's statement.

Personally I disagree with the 100,000 figure and the suggestion that Blair was wrong to invade (just the reasons). But your link does not address either of these issues.

Paul.
on Oct 12, 2004

Reply #4 By: Solitair - 10/12/2004 3:13:02 AM
Iraq did not possess such weapons


this statement is correct. Why do you believe it is wrong, or was it a different part of his response that you believed was wrong? Nothing in your link contradicts anything in Bahu's statement.

Personally I disagree with the 100,000 figure and the suggestion that Blair was wrong to invade (just the reasons). But your link does not address either of these issues.

Paul.


Come on now....do you *honestly* believe that the labs in question were sitting around doing nothing at all?
on Oct 13, 2004
What labs?

Where in the Druger report does it state that labs were working on WMD in the late 90's or eary 2000's? It states the opposite. I don't understand how you can read a report and then make the exact opposite conclusions?

Paul.
on Oct 14, 2004
The reasons why Tony Blair came out in support of Bush and the plan to invade Iraq have to be seen in the larger context of middle east policy. Iraq was a strong Arab power capable of leading a sustained Arab campaign to redraw the map of the middle est. I think you understand what exactly I mean. Hence she had to be destroyed and the Bushmen have succeeded. Let us see whether the precedent of the Nurember trials are invoked.