Jump to content

The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)


blandy

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

They don't care aslong as "their" side is doing the dictating.

They're not all loons. Many of the free Daily Heil at Waitrose fed types just don't have a Scooby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, desensitized43 said:

They don't care aslong as "their" side is doing the dictating.

They are both guilty of this IMO.  Governments like to have some to Govern IMO like disasters,  terrorism,  war and health.  They assume without them we are all to stupid to survive.    

Labour dictated that we went to war and the lives of 1000's were wasted for very little evidence or actually made up evidence.  (Labour taking us to war FFS 😲)

I think they are all poisoned by the power eventually,  human nature maybe ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Worth noting that only 2 Tory MPs voted against the invasion of Iraq.

Yeah, the Tories were criticising Labour for not doing more - before they decided to "help" Bush, they were chastising Labour for not just getting on with doing War.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Xann said:

Blair's vanity.

He saw an easy win and ticker tape parades.

Might have been part of it.

But it mainly the Realpolitik of deciding that anglo/US relations were a bigger priority for him than domestic criticism (and basic morality).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Worth noting that only 2 Tory MPs voted against the invasion of Iraq.

 

31 minutes ago, blandy said:

Yeah, the Tories were criticising Labour for not doing more - before they decided to "help" Bush, they were chastising Labour for not just getting on with doing War.

I wasn't of an age to pay too much attention to politics, but isn't it fair to say that they could only vote/criticise based on the false information they were given by the government, in the infamous dodgy dossier?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

 

I wasn't of an age to pay too much attention to politics, but isn't it fair to say that they could only vote/criticise based on the false information they were given by the government, in the infamous dodgy dossier?

Yes and no. It's certainly true that the government lied through their teeth, but it's not like there weren't lots of voices in the public sphere demanding 'to give the weapons inspectors time' and so on. The Tories had as little interest in hearing it as Blair did.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MPs to get pay rise while everyone can struggle. Disgusting

Quote

MPs are set to get a pay rise of £3,300 next year, despite coronavirus wreaking havoc on the UK economy. The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) proposed their wages should continue to be linked to the public sector three-month annual growth figure of 4.1%, which is likely to exceed inflation. This means MPs, some of whom are working from home, will get an additional £3,360 on top of their salary of £81,932. Nearly 700,000 people in the UK lost their jobs between March and August as businesses were ordered to shut their doors and less money circulated around the economy, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

 

I wasn't of an age to pay too much attention to politics, but isn't it fair to say that they could only vote/criticise based on the false information they were given by the government, in the infamous dodgy dossier?

They were doing it before the dossier, if I remember correctly, and I think I do because I was dead against it. The dossier came pretty late as a kind of cobbled together justification - even at the time it was commonly derided as a load of made up bollex by plenty of people and some of the media

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Yes and no. It's certainly true that the government lied through their teeth, but it's not like there weren't lots of voices in the public sphere demanding 'to give the weapons inspectors time' and so on. The Tories had as little interest in hearing it as Blair did.

Was always going to happen after 9/11 one way or the other to the next 'evil' regime in the middle east, Saddam just brought the bullet for Bush having the Wonka golden ticket and if he was going into the factory it was a given we would proof or no proof 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Follyfoot said:

Was always going to happen after 9/11 one way or the other to the next 'evil' regime in the middle east, Saddam just brought the bullet for Bush having the Wonka golden ticket and if he was going into the factory it was a given we would proof or no proof 

I kind of agree that it was always on the cards given who was in power in Washington and what they wanted, but I do want to stress that countries do have the option of *not doing* illegal wars, and they should take that option every time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

I kind of agree that it was always on the cards given who was in power in Washington and what they wanted, but I do want to stress that countries do have the option of *not doing* illegal wars, and they should take that option every time.

100% agree but with Pavlov's dog conditioning, especially with our friends across the pond it is an option that, sadly, will rarely be considered.

I was convinced pre Covid when Billy Britain was elected that we would be muscling up alongside Trump to jointly liberate some 'evil' regime of which we new little at the time but would very quickly find out about  before it kicking off. As Sabbath sang, "generals gathered in their masses"...................

 

Edited by Follyfoot
Wrong PROTUS should make sense now
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

Might have been part of it.

I think John Smith would have been more Robin Cook than Tony Blair, but that's conjecture on my part.

Blair was groomed by the US administration, and I somehow imagine the dangers were obscured by a vision of his own glowing future.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I kind of agree that it was always on the cards given who was in power in Washington and what they wanted, but I do want to stress that countries do have the option of *not doing* illegal wars, and they should take that option every time.

the option of not doing war always exists as proven by our not declaring war on Saudi Arabia 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/10/2020 at 15:35, bickster said:

Allegra Stratton announced as new Press Secretary for Number 10

 

On 08/10/2020 at 15:50, ml1dch said:

Called it. 

 

On 08/10/2020 at 15:52, Chindie said:

Married to the chief editor of Spectator, an editor of which is married to Cummings.

Tough, tough interview there no doubt.

The Discourse on Twitter about this today has been truly dismal to behold. This is the sort of comment that makes me consider armed revolution TBH:

'make their meritocratic way' 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

 

 

The Discourse on Twitter about this today has been truly dismal to behold. This is the sort of comment that makes me consider armed revolution TBH:

'make their meritocratic way' 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

Please don’t make me choose between a tory apologist and Chris prick for brains Bryant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â