Paddy Ashdowns view on what next?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by whiffler, Jan 25, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Independent article

    my bold .... anyone take that particular publication?.

    Paddy for next head of UN ??
  2. Somewhat at odds with the position of Ming the Charismaless...
  3. Not suprising because former booty paddy isn't your typical whinging lefty arrse that makes up the liberal democrats.

    This article makes a lot of sense.
  4. Bang on Paddy.
  5. Why, oh why, oh why is this guy in with the lib-dems?

    If he was running the Thatcher show, he'd be prime minister tomorrow.

    He's done his bit, he's done it harder than just about everyone on this forum, he's got loads of experience and he's by no means daft. If only he could get some of the wiles of a career scumbag (like Blair but without the lies), he'd be at the top of the food chain in no time.

    I think he would make a superb statesman.

    His reasoning on the current conflicts is bang-on. Anyone would think he'd got it verbatim from the 'Giblets Manual on Global Power' but I think he's actually thought this up himself without my 'intervention'.

    Edited 'cos I've just spotted me own Hubris, thingy and wossname.
  6. Forgot to say on my first post:

    Bloody well said, Mr ashdown.
  7. There's no place in British politics for a man of Mr Ashdown's intelligence, experience and integrity. After all he only had an affair once and was decent enough to straighten things up with his wife. Hardly rates as a score compared with the bedhopping, outright lying and general moral bankruptcy of the current lot.
  8. I remember the conservatives making a slur on his intelligence when he was leader of the Lib Dems, he makes more sense than the rest of them put together.
  9. Paddy Ashdown's analysis shown above is excellent. Well done!

    However, the cynic in me says this would not have been his analysis were he still seeking your vote. He has the 'freedom' to tell it as he 'really' sees it since he is not seeking public office. The majority of political decisions are made based upon how they will be seen, and the effect upon, the domestic electorate; they are not made in the best interests of those who they affect.

    Iraq was invaded because it played will to the US electorate - sod what the Iraqis thought or what it meant to them. The US will pull out when withdraw gets more votes than it loses - sod what the consequences are for the Iraqis themselves. The British position is, however, a little different. Tony Blair was on a mission (from god) and the British population was largely apathetic - so he got away with going to war. It's now becoming more of an issue, directly and indirectly (through military criticism), and the timing of the 'our' withdraw is now being dictated by public pressure (and money) not his desire to see his 'mission' out or because it's good for the Iraqis.

    Those seeking public office tell you what they think you consider is right - not what is right.
  10. I don't disagree with anything Paddy is saying but who is pushing forward an increase in defence spending? And an increase in the size of the Army?
  11. Ashdown is a dedicated Europhile, so me might get on well in today's Tory Party. He also spread lies about our historic Christian ally Serbia, and supported Islamists in Bosnia.
  12. Perhaps you could expand this further?

    So Milosevic, Mladic and Karadjic are simply the result of a campaign of lies and disinformation by Mr. Ashdown?

    Is the International Criminal Tribunal simply a device to persecute our 'Historic Christian Allies"?

    Why did we go into Bosnia and Kosovo again, can you remember Hereward?
  13. Our treasonous policy in the Balkans was a German-initiated long-term plan to expand EU control into the Balkans.
  14. Good grief.

    'Treasonous' - How exactly? Please answer the questions I posed, they were not intended to be rhetorical. Your answer is evasive.