IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Sticky Wicket
I don't see Blair as a toady. Great Britain seems to be remarkably prosperous in some indefinable sense. I don't know the numbers on their economy, and in any case that's not what I'm getting at. The people seem to be asserting themselves the way they always do, with restrained authority. We Americans are too quick to forget where we got these ideas.

But the Brits are too quick to forget that our Revolution was more than happy words. We really did, we really DO, believe in being free of Kings, even elected ones - and by extension, too much reliance on the wisdom of the past.

So I think the Brits are happy to side with us, because they know we need them. Without them we are nothing. That they survived our Revolution proves how strong they are, and how solid. After all, at the same time they had a few problems on the continent.

And the Americans are happy to side with the Brits, because we love to show them how gracious we are with our inheritance.

Blair and Bush. Where is Blair from, and how do the English talk about him?
-drl
New Re: Actually Tony Blair is Scottish
From Edinburgh. [link|http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/page97.asp|Tony Blair]

He has been immensly popular in the past & won his current term with a lanslide victory - he had a bad time a couple of years back but he is still highly regarded. But, his stance on Iraq is not supported - by the opposition tories or even his own back-bench. There has been talk of a back-bench revolt if it comes to the crunch.

It doesn't seem to reach US news services as to the extent of dissatisfaction with this policy. This week Blair addressed the powerful TUC (Trade Union Congress) that supports his labour govt. He had a hard time convincing them of the merits of the policy.
[link|http://politics.guardian.co.uk/unions/story/0,12189,789968,00.html|Blair at TUC]


[link|http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,667656,00.html|Issue of legalities of pre-emptive attack]

Exceprt:

"What the lawyers didn't tell Blair is that any right of pre-emptive self-defence would be dangerous. Who decides that a threat justifies anticipatory action? How does one protect against opportunistic interventions justified on the basis of pre-emptive self-defence? The UN charter is clear: in the absence of an attack, the security council alone can act. "


Cheers

Doug Marker


Expand Edited by dmarker2 Sept. 11, 2002, 01:53:58 AM EDT
     Saddam stepping up quest for nukes - (marlowe) - (16)
         Pay close attention. - (Brandioch)
         If and when they get close Israel will knock them flat - (boxley)
         Re: Stupidity by association - (dmarker2) - (13)
             Doubts - (deSitter) - (12)
                 Brits are for it? - (Silverlock) - (11)
                     Yep, mostly it is Tony "W's poodle" Blair for it. -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (2)
                         Sticky Wicket - (deSitter) - (1)
                             Re: Actually Tony Blair is Scottish - (dmarker2)
                     Public Opinion - (ChrisR) - (7)
                         MAD is still on. - (Ashton)
                         Re: Guilt by what association - (dmarker2) - (5)
                             Connections - (ChrisR) - (4)
                                 Re: Connections - (dmarker2) - (3)
                                     Aye, you are right Doug. Thus spake Osama. -NT - (a6l6e6x)
                                     on 911 the Pals were an afterthought - (boxley) - (1)
                                         Re: PAL Peoples always featured in OBL's activity - (dmarker2)

When you just can't miss an opportunity to belabor the obvious.
53 ms