LymmParent Posted December 8, 2009 Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Tory Tony got us involved in four wars in his decade of ego mania - this is a guy who's never worn the Queen's uniform - maybe he wasn't allowed toy soldies as kid or something?! As for Saddam having "blood on his hands"; what about Robert Mugabe - opps forgot - no oil involved. Think you need to get real LP; peace and senity hasn't returned to Iraq (a load just got blown up in Bagdad); but the oil is now flowing and Haliburton and Co have secured plently of contracts- such is the cynism and expediency of global politics. Iran is not a good place to be yet, but it's lot better than it was, Obs. I'm not naive or stupid, and no politician is perfect, but really, you need to make your mind up. You do want the Navy sent to Somalia to protect tourists; you don't want the Army in Afghanistan to fight terrorists. You don't think they should have sorted Saddam, it was all for Blair's CV; but you do think they should sort Mugabwe. Tell me how Blair could have won your approval when you don't know what you approve of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2009 Obviously your struggling to keep up LP, and are now deliberately trying to misrepresent my views to score a point. 1) Pirates: are operating on the high seas in INTERNATIONAL waters, operating out of a failed State - imo they can be suppresed by air and sea power alone, with a UN mandate, hence no need to send troops in and get tied down in another futile engagement. 2) Zimbawe: no need to get involved in direct military action, but there may be options and opportunities to assist the opposition in that country in other ways. 3) Iraq: was a sovereign Nation, and we now know that the point and purpose of the invasion, was regime change; contrary to international law in the absence of a clear and specific UN mandate. The illegallity thus making all consequent events and loss of life - illegal; which constitutes a war crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 So, after umpteen witnesses, including the arch-villain; has anyone learnt anything they didn't know already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 So, after umpteen witnesses, including the arch-villain; has anyone learnt anything they didn't know already? nope.... always knew that Blair was a liar and so was Brown! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 slightly worse than him being a liar Baz; imo he's a psycopath and should be on trial at the Hague. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
safeway56 Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 Blair as usual was as slippy as a greased eel but having said that even I could out-think the pussycats who's job was supposed to give him a grilling to attempt to find the truth. It reminded me of the days when ministers used to appear on TV years ago and faced withering questions such as *Has the minister anything to announce to the nation?* Blair should face a couple of hours with Paxman. Is there anywhere in this country where Blair can appear in public i.e. theatres or restaurants, without facing the wrath of the general public ? If I ever got within earshot he'd get both barrels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 slightly worse than him being a liar Baz; imo he's a psycopath and should be on trial at the Hague. must be mad.... have you seen the state of the bint he married??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wireless Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 I don't think Blair lied, to be a liar you have to know what you are saying is untrue.Scary as it may seem I really think Blair believed all the nonsense he was spouting and still probably believes it. He's deluded, vain and unwilling to see any other point but his own.But we all knew that before the inquiry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 3, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2010 Think your right - he does believe it; that's why I think the guy's a sociopath. In answer to one of the questions, he inferred that "Countries that don't share OUR values" are ripe for regime change - then even went on to sound bellicose over Iran - scary indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.