Blair, leader of Europe

[Joemoz]

Blair was the greatest political talent in Europe for many many years and he could have gone down in history as a truly great leader.

Unfortunately he turned out to be a very bad judge of character which allowed him to be hoodwinked by an unscrupulous Cheney administration into the crusade that we all know about.

Still, despite his leading probably the least succesful foreign policy for any British prime minister since Chamberlain, I think his legacy will be a positive one all in all. Just not what it could have been.

[so heart]

but why then irak??? there are lots of dictator assholes in africa. but one single cruise missile is more expensive than everything you can destroy there...
bush had no rational and much less any ethical reason for this intervention. bush acts by by base motives, nothing else... also maybe a personal feud against saddam...

[so heart]

truth is ,you say that so easily without any idea of the logistics of how that would even happen.seriously,how does that happen? does it get put in trucks? does it then go to ship.....and then go to america ports oh ,its all just so stupid.

another one

they would just sell and transport it the same way as irak did before. pipelines, ships. maybe to europe or china. but i have to admit... i dont know if even that was succesfull.

[glennjridge]

God told him to,it was a personal feud against saddam,bush wants oil,people are just throwin stuff out there.

for a war that supposedly was a mistake we sure seem to be battling the mentality that hit america.it obviously wasnt that offtarget.

[Danny C]

theres always going to be the talk of "war for oil'. it was even brought up in the first gulf war.

truth is ,you say that so easily without any idea of the logistics of how that would even happen.seriously,how does that happen? does it get put in trucks? does it then go to ship.....and then go to america ports oh ,its all just so stupid.

how many people in the media alone, would love to uncover that and present it to say AHA! see we told you.yet nothing.this huge supposed operation.

but it never happnes. because it isnt happening.I know what I pay at the pump. if only we stole their oil.

Yeah, I've always thought the "war for oil argument" was somewhat incongruous myself. Certainly, it's a reason, but it's by no means the most important reason. I don't think it's even in the top 5.

1) Bush had a personal score to settle with Iraq after Saddam tried to kill his father.
2) The US wanted to test out some of its new WMDs in a battle situation.
3) It wanted to bomb Iraq so it could hand valuable rebuilding contracts to its companies and boost an economy that had been decimated by Bush's policies.
4) It wanted a scapegoat for the 9/11 attacks, and divert attention away from its failure/unwillingness to catch Osama.
5) It wanted to stop the Dollar being abandoned by the OPEC nations (arguably the most important reason, and yet the least talked about)

[glennjridge]

truth is ,you say that so easily without any idea of the logistics of how that would even happen.seriously,how does that happen? does it get put in trucks? does it then go to ship.....and then go to america ports oh ,its all just so stupid.

another one

they would just sell and transport it the same way as irak did before. pipelines, ships. maybe to europe or china. but i have to admit... i dont know if even that was succesfull.

how many people are trying to bust bush on stealing oil?
I mean just people and the media in america alone...not even getting into europe.

I dont think you have a grasp of the concept of how big in maginitude stealing oil is. it certainly isnt like smuggling in mexicans across the border I assure you.

[glennjridge]

danny, my personal opinion to this point... would be something along the lines of an overreaction to 9/11. looking back now its easy to look at things in a more sober way and cast stones but we never had buildings full of thousands plunge inside a city block, the pentagon attacked.....

I am sure Bush thought the next step in the future would be a nuclear detonation in our citys, and decided to go for the full package deal and operate on a big scale to change the status quo in the middle east rather than just take down some shadowey terrorist group.

he went for the big change.

[Danny C]

I could excuse an over-reaction to 9/11, if there was even the slightest bit of evidence that Hussein was connected to the atrocity. But there was nada. This war was engineered against Iraq for reasons we may never completely understand, and I find that unforgivable.

[so heart]

I dont think you have a grasp of the concept of how big in maginitude stealing oil is. it certainly isnt like smuggling in mexicans across the border I assure you.

who says smuggling??? oil companies dont steal it if they can possess it. or if they have people in political key-positions. and btw: i think rumsfeld managed to get enough armors there to guard some oilsprings

[so heart]

I could excuse an over-reaction to 9/11, if there was even the slightest bit of evidence that Hussein was connected to the atrocity. But there was nada. This war was engineered against Iraq for reasons we may never completely understand, and I find that unforgivable.

yes, that wasnt an overreaction. that was a completely misscalculated attack. it weakened immensely the american influence in the world. america was/is out. even china has more sympathy, i guess. the next president has to cope with this.

[Janet Street-Porter]

for a war that supposedly was a mistake we sure seem to be battling the mentality that hit america.it obviously wasnt that offtarget.

Yes, because America invading Iraq was a clarion call to the insurgents. I really don't know how anybody can still defend the invasion of Iraq. Every day bombs are going off killing scores of people and all Blair can do is make lame jokes, say he did what he thought was right (well duh!) and smarm off into the sunset and million pound book contracts. Iraq was always going to fragment once Saddam was removed from power and however bad he was, you simply can't do what they did. Blair should be put on trial in The Hague - then diana can go and see her 'hero' in the flesh.

[so heart]

i wonder if there are other pop-music forums with such intensiv political discussion.
but now i go to bed, otherwise i will overrun you all in posts
gd night

[glennjridge]

for a war that supposedly was a mistake we sure seem to be battling the mentality that hit america.it obviously wasnt that offtarget.

Yes, because America invading Iraq was a clarion call to the insurgents. I really don't know how anybody can still defend the invasion of Iraq. Every day bombs are going off killing scores of people and all Blair can do is make lame jokes, say he did what he thought was right (well duh!) and smarm off into the sunset and million pound book contracts. Iraq was always going to fragment once Saddam was removed from power and however bad he was, you simply can't do what they did. Blair should be put on trial in The Hague - then diana can go and see her 'hero' in the flesh.

the terrorists didnt need an any Iraq invasion for a "clarion call" or call to arms. they've always been doing what they've been doing since before we were all born.

the reality is, a war between east and west civilization has always been a forgone conclusion.

saddam was simply unlucky enough to play the rebel role when the US was all jittery and panicked about WMD in terrorists hands after 9/11.

as far as blair in the hague your dreamin. of course they can do what they did. saddam gave them the green light by bluffing when he should have folded.

[glennjridge]

I could excuse an over-reaction to 9/11, if there was even the slightest bit of evidence that Hussein was connected to the atrocity. But there was nada. This war was engineered against Iraq for reasons we may never completely understand, and I find that unforgivable.

yes, that wasnt an overreaction. that was a completely misscalculated attack. it weakened immensely the american influence in the world. america was/is out. even china has more sympathy, i guess. the next president has to cope with this.

I must have missed that often alluded to here time when america was liked by europe.thats just talk to say gee look what you've done america! oh hum de dum dum.

fact is america and europe have always had the same relationship thru history not unlike a school jock and a some mixed up goth chick.

[glennjridge]

I dont think you have a grasp of the concept of how big in maginitude stealing oil is. it certainly isnt like smuggling in mexicans across the border I assure you.

who says smuggling??? oil companies dont steal it if they can possess it. or if they have people in political key-positions. and btw: i think rumsfeld managed to get enough armors there to guard some oilsprings

well use the first gulf war as a chart. we were accused of "war for oil" way back in 91.we didnt posses it then...how long are you going to beat that dead horse?

war for oil.itsjust a slogan for political minded college kids eager to give their lives an interesting slant protesting something american so they can tell their grandkids about the day they marched in the street for a cause. people arent difficult to figure out.