Cowboy British

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 5:14 pm

Funny stuff

I guess good old Bush is rubbing off on ya brits main chap. Yeah thats my best british slang so live with it.

Curios about your(British folk, or others) opinion about how Blair is taking so well to good old George.

I think its awsome someone else is actually on our side, even if were being a little hasty or what not. Just the fact someone else has the tenacity (or wanting of press coverage i cant begin to know why) to stand up with us.

thug
(p.s. Us=American)

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 6:00 pm

All things considered.... I can't say I'm surprised.....

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 6:26 pm

Originally posted by RandomThug
I think its awsome someone else is actually on our side, even if were being a little hasty or what not.

Considering that Dubyah's eagerly rushing towards a fullscale war of invasion against a foreign nation, I'm going to place your remark above in the running for the 2002 GameBanshee Understatement of the Year.

gnomethingy · Post by **gnomethingy** » Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:08 pm

"Georgie Poorgie Puddin Pie, I don't care how high your approval rating is you still look like a confused muppet, no lie" (Ho ho ho Dumb quote)

Maybe somone 'l get a kick outta this.....

Minerva · Post by **Minerva** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 2:18 am

Blair is just enjoying acting like a president. He hasn't even spoken to his own cabinet, let alone to the parliament.

Rob-hin · Post by **Rob-hin** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 4:39 am

Originally posted by Minerva
Blair is just enjoying acting like a president. He hasn't even spoken to his own cabinet, let alone to the parliament.

Just like his great rolemodel, Bush.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 4:53 am

Tony Blairs main problem is his grounding as a lawyer and who he chooses to surround himself with.

He isn't very definitive in his actions thus far, every move he makes is either Europe engendered or is just following in someone elses footsteps, it has long been my assertation that of all President Bush's foibles at least he appears to make direct action unlike Blair who sits on a fence.

Blair's surrounding himself with yes men would seem too cliche to even consider, unfortunately it is true. His cabinet is made up of lackeys and the only person who seems to be able to stand up to him is John Presscott and even he is a slimey number.

Apparently Presscott fights for the common man, if that were true he would have given Blair a left jab instead of one of the public

In my opinion Blair is the worst of evils, he is completely diffident and indecisive in his thoughts and actions, if he ever wants to get anywhere in Europe he has to at least project the image of control and forcefulness otherwise every other nation will roll over him.

On the subject of Blair sticking up for America by saying Iraq is a threat, good on him, i see no problem with it in theory, just as long as he doesn't follow D!ck Cheney's USA blindly, his first concern should be his own country, not creating himself as some mythic all encompasing figure of democracy which seems to be Blair's intention. As Minerva so rightly pointed out, he has no backing from the cabinet yet, but from my experience they will just agree with him anyway

The actual threat from Iraq is debatable (and has been debated

) this is more of a Blair issue than a Saddam or Bush issue.

Rant over!

Minerva · Post by **Minerva** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 6:06 am

Originally posted by Rob-hin

Just like his great rolemodel, Bush.

The difference is that the Prime Minister of UK is not elected separately from the parliament, unlike the President which has separate election (even though it was messy). He's leader of the Labour Party, which is voted by the Labour mambers, and the party became majority in the parliament, hence the PM Blair. He's confused the fact people voted for the party (except in his constituency) and not himself.

Or, should I say people voted NOT the Tories...

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 3:34 pm

Well...he's got a nice suit hasn't he...

.

BTW - spam - in america do you write 'curios' where we write 'curious', or was that a spelling mistake?

I for one wish Blair would actually ask someone else before he goes ahead with supporting this most serious of actions, right or wrong. Fact is he may not even have his party's support, let alone the voters...the country he is supposed to be a representative of

...

Robnark · Post by **Robnark** » Thu Sep 05, 2002 3:53 pm

Originally posted by frogus
I for one wish Blair would actually ask someone else before he goes ahead with supporting this most serious of actions, right or wrong. Fact is he may not even have his party's support, let alone the voters...the country he is supposed to be a representative of ...

that's about the size of it. although the cabinet as a whole will probably tow the party line no matter what, even they're getting annoyed by the PM's unwillingness to even have a debate and make even the pretence of a considered decision. not only do most people in this country not want a war in Iraq, a large number of MPs don't either, and the lack of debate, meaningful or not, is frankly frustrating.

also, it doesn't help Blair's image, as he's doing nothing to show he isn't just going to do whatever Dubya wants instead of making a decision for Britain, the country he's meant to be representing.

kopywrite · Post by **kopywrite** » Fri Sep 06, 2002 7:36 am

Anyone old enough to remember New Model Army?

"Here in the land of opportunity, watch us revel in our liberty
You can say what you like but it doesn't change anything
Because the corridors of power are an ocean away

We're the 51st state of America"

Released in 1985.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Sat Sep 07, 2002 2:59 pm

I don't like TB. I don't agree with the political system of our country. But I have had this debate on another forum, where one guy suggested TB f*** off to America.

Would he say that if jet planes had rammed into the (pathetically small) tower blocks of London?

The standard argument was votes and distarcting the electorate with war. How dumb are people - if as many people don't wan't this war in the UK as they say - who is going to vote for him now?! Are people that stupid they will let war with Iraq "distract" them?

I think TB is doing the right thing for once - in the face of voter ignorance. Sometimes people have to be dragged kicking and screaming into safety, for their own good.

The Trade Unions are opposing war here - WTF has it to do with them?! Their sons won't have to die, haven't died in Terror.

Politicians are disagreeing - the politik being that it is a chance to disagree with the US and make them stand down. You must understand, there are many in the UK who want to see the US humiliated. They just don't have the guts to fly the planes themselves. I vehemently reject those people to stand with Americans.

That won't happen, though, even if they have to do it alone. Its the right thing to do and they will always have people like me who are willing to stand with them through the worst of it.

Robnark · Post by **Robnark** » Sat Sep 07, 2002 3:21 pm

Originally posted by Gruntboy
That won't happen, though, even if they have to do it alone. Its the right thing to do and they will always have people like me who are willing to stand with them through the worst of it.

that's a fair enough position, but i would personally like to see some sort of political discussion of the issue. Blair is going to do whatever Dubya does, irrespective of the arguments. The government will, on the whole, support whatever Blair choses to do. I still don't think that justifies abandoning all semblance of a political process, especially since the main opposition officially support war and Blair and most of the powerful figures in government do as well.

in this climate i still believe it would be a sensible idea to at least discuss the issue in parliament or make some effort to put out the British position, wether it is the same as America's position or not. If Bush goes to war i would put money on Blair going along with it, but unless there is some way for those who do not support it to get heard, regardless of the impact they may (or may not) have on the final decision, we are relying solely on the American administration to decide for us.

If Blair is pro-war he should make a statement to that effect, and make it democratically. is it any wonder that the levels of voter apathy are so high?

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Sat Sep 07, 2002 3:38 pm

That's a fair enough position. However, you're assuming that (despite apathy) voters have power beyond voting in a specific party/leader. The votes were cast, power handed over to a few and now people want to pick over only those decisions they don't like?

I also disagree that the government will go along with Tony. That's precisely the point - he's made a stand and they disagree with him! I admire him for taking a stand where the vocal minority are WRONG. He could be destroying his "political" career but History will look kindly on him. But they're alrighy, Jack, the party faithful live in expensive Islington flats that won't be doused with burning airliner fuel and body parts.

Many people who voted for TB are now decrying his stand with Bush. You can't please all the people...

EDIT - and "pro-war"? We're not all eager for blood you know. Some of us just don't want to wait for more Terror attacks, calmly receiving a weapon of mass destruction as we bend over. I think it is entirely probable to be "anti-war" yet still be firmly reconciled to the necessary evil that war requries.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Sat Sep 07, 2002 3:46 pm

In your opinion Grunt how much difference does the UK joining forces with Dubbyah really have on the US offensive against Iraq, I must admit i agree with Blair that if he is going to put support against America he has to actually visibally do it rather than just be an apologist after the fact...i can't recall the exact quote.

I also mean from the point of view that the bush administration seem to have large convictions towards removing the Hussein leadership, I wonder if the UK can really effect the decisions by Dubbyah in any way.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Sun Sep 08, 2002 3:04 am

Can we all maybe carry out this debate a little less emotionally?

Sorry to sound like a bore and bring this up again, but what evidence is there that Hussein is planning more terror attacks? If there is no evidence to back that assertion up, then despite the high level of emotion that exists with regards to terrorism the attack on Iraq has little or nothing to do with stopping terrorism against the US.