Some of you must have voted for Tony?
Posted by: Sloop John B on 14 August 2015
From this side of the pond for all Tony Blair's supposed faults I can't overlook the huge effort he (and Bill and Bertie) put into trying to find a peaceful solution to the seemingly intractable situation in Northern Ireland. I cannot believe the man is all bad and purely in it for himself as seems to be the common perception in the UK nowadays.
And an an awful lot of you must have voted for him. Is this hero turned villain syndrome?
The Corbyn thread just got me thinking.
Nowt as queer as folk.
What is the problem with Tony? As far as I can see, he is the best Labour PM that UK has ever had.
I am aware that he has dome a number of things that many consider as serious mistakes, but he did it in good faith based on faulty intelligent reports.
Have you never heard of Clem Atlee? The best peacetime PM of the 20th century and perhaps ever?
As for the second point, I'm going to be kind and assume you're being ironic rather than just incredibly naive.
At the time I voted for him and his party.. I was caught up in the moment.. The Tory government at that time was appalling.. I remember staying up all night watching the results come up and feeling jubilant... However in hindsight his apparatus around him were the master of spin and messaging and in the end I resented the extent I felt I had been duped.
His complete failure, in my opinion, of his leadership to pick up on what was impacting and hurting real people outside his Westminster bubble alienated a lot of his support in UK. His real failure to tackle immigration and EU migration and the real and perceived impacts to the UK population is something we are still reeling from. Also encouraging (continued by Brown) the City of London banking industry to grow to the extent it did to fuel an unsustainable welfare budget I think was gross irresponsibility which we will be paying for for a long time to come..
Simon
What is the problem with Tony? As far as I can see, he is the best Labour PM that UK has ever had.
I am aware that he has dome a number of things that many consider as serious mistakes, but he did it in good faith based on faulty intelligent reports.
Have you never heard of Clem Atlee? The best peacetime PM of the 20th century and perhaps ever?
As for the second point, I'm going to be kind and assume you're being ironic rather than just incredibly naive.
Of course I know Clement Attlee, who succeeded Churchill, but I still think Tony is a better PM because he brought the UK out of the recession.
As for second point, I am fully aware of all of the bitter controversies, the real reason I brought it out because I think he has been unfairly treated. It was the system, it was US, and its allies who were at faults, Tony Blair, the UK parliament, the British public were also at fault.
What is the problem with Tony? As far as I can see, he is the best Labour PM that UK has ever had.
I am aware that he has dome a number of things that many consider as serious mistakes, but he did it in good faith based on faulty intelligent reports.
Have you never heard of Clem Atlee? The best peacetime PM of the 20th century and perhaps ever?
As for the second point, I'm going to be kind and assume you're being ironic rather than just incredibly naive.
Of course I know Clement Attlee, who succeeded Churchill, but I still think Tony is a better PM because he brought the UK out of the recession.
As for second point, I am fully aware of all of the bitter controversies, the real reason I brought it out because I think he has been unfairly treated. It was the system, it was US, and its allies who were at faults, Tony Blair, the UK parliament, the British public were also at fault.
What recession? The recession was in 1990/91 with another blip caused by the ERM crisis the following year. Blair was elected in 1997, so the recession had been over for half a decade. Attlee was elected to a country that was effectively bankrupt, but still managed to create the NHS and the welfare state, some of which survives to this day, despite Tory and New Labour attempts to dismantle it.
Attlee may not have had Blair's dubious charisma but he was a far greater man, and left a far bigger and much more honourable legacy.
Blair deserves all he gets - if anything, he has been too softly treated.
I would vote for him still. The best prime minister since Churchill. He was wrong about the Iraq war, but in my opinion was badly advised.
Yes indeed well put Simon
I would never ever vote labour, memories of previous labour governments, the labour movement as a whole, unions, winters of discontent, inflation, taxation, bank rates in double digits etc.
But Blair & his new labour had a refreshing new vision & I thought long & hard about were my vote would go. I was happy enough with Blair's early years, but in hindsight it would have been hard to not have grown out of the mess left by the previous government & the rest of the western world in a growth phase.
The problem I see as a result of the Blair new labour movement is that its made it difficult for a continuation of centre left reforms, new labour has dirt on its shoes. Labour is in need of a top to bottom overhaul: they no longer have Scotland & I can't see an old labour style left leaning party mustering enough support to ever be in government again, I can see a centre-left new labour Mk-II doing something, but without Scotland it will be really tough.
My view is that Blair, almost single-handedly, dragged the UK Labour party, kicking and screaming, into the modern world. Before him, Labour acted as if it simply didn’t understand capitalism, as if there were no tomorrow with sky-high borrowing, with severe anti-enterprise taxation policy. One of the examples of the UK Labour creations is the NHS, which is not simply sustainable.
Along with Saatchi and Saatchi and the new contemporaries of the the British Arts and Music scenes Teflon Tony made London "Swinging " again in 1997 , that made me feel that my vote was not wasted .
If the Conservative party and who knows ? - Prime Minister - was in power at the time of September 11 2001- does anyone think that we would be in any better situation than what happened with Tony ?
I would vote for him still. The best prime minister since Churchill. He was wrong about the Iraq war, but in my opinion was badly advised.
If he was so badly advised, why doesn't he come out and say it? And let us know who these erroneous advisers were.
Truth be told, Blair only has three advisers - his wife, his ego and his God. With Iraq, it was the latter two which prevailed. Disastrously too, for just about everyone, apart from Blair himself, who seems to have done rather nicely out of the whole affair.
. One of the examples of the UK Labour creations is the NHS, which is not simply sustainable.
Rubbish. The UK is one of the world's richest countries, and a well-run NHS is perfectly sustainable, as well as being morally and socially desirable.
What it requires is the will to sustain it, but Tory and big business (think of the insurance, Big Pharma and Serco-style outsourcers who'd love to get their grubby little mitts on those fat NHS budgets) hatred of communitarianism, means this is lacking on the government's, if not the public's, part.
The NHS' viability has been further stymied by cretinous PFI initiatives - created by New Labour, another example of Blair & Co's egregious legacy.
I would vote for him still. The best prime minister since Churchill. He was wrong about the Iraq war, but in my opinion was badly advised.
If he was so badly advised, why doesn't he come out and say it? And let us know who these erroneous advisers were.
Truth be told, Blair only has three advisers - his wife, his ego and his God. With Iraq, it was the latter two which prevailed. Disastrously too, for just about everyone, apart from Blair himself, who seems to have done rather nicely out of the whole affair.
er ... Wasn't one of them David Kelly..
. One of the examples of the UK Labour creations is the NHS, which is not simply sustainable.
Rubbish. The UK is one of the world's richest countries, and a well-run NHS is perfectly sustainable, as well as being morally and socially desirable.
What it requires is the will to sustain it, but Tory and big business (think of the insurance, Big Pharma and Serco-style outsourcers who'd love to get their grubby little mitts on those fat NHS budgets) hatred of communitarianism, means this is lacking on the government's, if not the public's, part.
The NHS' viability has been further stymied by cretinous PFI initiatives - created by New Labour, another example of Blair & Co's egregious legacy.
only 25% of British people earn over £30.000 a year. Who has all this wealth ?
This year I voted Labour because I like my local MP Sadiq Khan - he is a very good and hard-working constituency MP, with at least a vestigial attachment to proper old-fashioned Labour values.
If he was standing for the Labour party leadership, as I think he should, I don't think Corbyn would be in the lead. I believe he stood aside saying he didn't want his family to go through the media attention that would come with standing, and I can understand that, but politics is (meant) to about doing what you think is best for the country, not for you or your family. Maybe he'll change his mind before the next election.
No. The unfortunate Dr Kelly wasn't an advisor to Blair. He was a weapons expert and inspector. He certainly didn't advise Blair to go to war. Dr Kelly's role is very well documented but if you can't be bothered to research it I am sure myself of someone else can do you a précis...
No. The unfortunate Dr Kelly wasn't an advisor to Blair. He was a weapons expert and inspector. He certainly didn't advise Blair to go to war. Dr Kelly's role is very well documented but if you can't be bothered to research it I am sure myself of someone else can do you a précis...
A hard working, unassuming civil servant thrown to the wolves by the politicians and their advisers I think sums it up.
. One of the examples of the UK Labour creations is the NHS, which is not simply sustainable.
Rubbish. The UK is one of the world's richest countries, and a well-run NHS is perfectly sustainable, as well as being morally and socially desirable.
What it requires is the will to sustain it, but Tory and big business (think of the insurance, Big Pharma and Serco-style outsourcers who'd love to get their grubby little mitts on those fat NHS budgets) hatred of communitarianism, means this is lacking on the government's, if not the public's, part.
The NHS' viability has been further stymied by cretinous PFI initiatives - created by New Labour, another example of Blair & Co's egregious legacy.
only 25% of British people earn over £30.000 a year. Who has all this wealth ?
Wealth is indeed concentrated in the hands of the top couple of percentiles but the fact remains we are very rich as a nation:
The GDP (ie output) of the UK was £1.76 trillion in 2013. National wealth (assets minus liabilities, or the country's net wealth at a given time) in 2014 was $14.2 trillion. GDP per head (2013) is over $41,000.
There is plenty to go round, and more than enough to pay for the NHS. Clamp down on tax evasion/avoidance by companies and individuals, and drop vanity projects like HS2 and Trident and there's even more.
No. The unfortunate Dr Kelly wasn't an advisor to Blair. He was a weapons expert and inspector. He certainly didn't advise Blair to go to war. Dr Kelly's role is very well documented but if you can't be bothered to research it I am sure myself of someone else can do you a précis...
Who is responsible for crediting accountability here ? Detractors of Blair are keen to say that what good came out of him was really to the credit of others but were swept aside by spin. And what bad came out of him was solely his own doing. Uh.
Come on Tobes - are you being obtuse? Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
Chief among Blair's FP advisors were Sir David Manning and Sir John Sawers but as far as I can recall both urged caution. Blair was determined to go to war in 2003 regardless of whether or not Saddam possessed WMDs. It was an ideological choice, not one governed by "bad advice" as Blair apologists maintain. He and Bush wanted regime change.
In December 2009, in an interview with Fern Britton on the BBC, he admitted as much. Just google "Fern Britton meets Tony Blair" and you can find it.
Come on Tobes - are you being obtuse? Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
Chief among Blair's FP advisors were Sir David Manning and Sir John Sawers but as far as I can recall both urged caution. Blair was determined to go to war in 2003 regardless of whether or not Saddam possessed WMDs. It was an ideological choice, not one governed by "bad advice" as Blair apologists maintain. He and Bush wanted regime change.
In December 2009, in an interview with Fern Britton on the BBC, he admitted as much. Just google "Fern Britton meets Tony Blair" and you can find it.
Yes you are right of course . should I back Corbyn ?
should I back Corbyn ?
Nothing to do with me, but I think you should vote according to your conscience or beliefs.
Kevin-W
Putting aside all this Blairloney, I have recently taken a shine to the writings of Jacques Derrida (perhaps that's were the obtuseness comes from).
Not sure how his particular position and writings would translate to today's situations in UK ,but I find his thoughts and feelings both affected and aggressive . I think it is amazing that he could write a book just about a pair of shoes from a painting and load it with meaning about the greater world.
he could write a book just about a pair of shoes
He'd obviously be pro Theresa May.
he could write a book just about a pair of shoes
He'd obviously be pro Theresa May.
Double negative creative assimilation ?