UK Iraq policy a rank disaster

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by ABrighter2006, Nov 8, 2006.

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. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6128630.stm

    ... He went on to say "the proper legal advice from the Foreign office on the legality of the war was ignored".

    And he attacked the "politicisation" of the diplomatic service. Promotion depended on agreeing with Mr Blair...

    Interesting comments in relation to the party line and promotion, etc.
     
  2. ...the picture doesn't look any prettier.
     
  3. There is an Iraq policy????
     
  4. This part interested me:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6128630.stm

    Yet another smoking gun with Bliar's prints all over it? :twisted:
     
  5. From the same article;

    On Iraq, he said the measure of success in foreign policy should be "minimisation of suffering" and "if that is your measure, our policy has been a rank disaster in the last few years in terms of blood shed".

    Minimisation of suffering, my heart sank when I read this. Wise, wise words. Anyone touched by war, either soldier or civilian would surely agree with these words. We can't have an enquiry now because it might upset the troops, oh, and it might upset the last few months of Blair's rank leadership.
     
  6. When will a future Opposition Day debate be offered up for another Iraq inquiry vote??? Perhaps the result will be slightly different after this intervention and after some critical Congressional questioning. :twisted:
     
  7. Hmmmmmmm

    Tell me again, Just why did rebel Labour MPs vote WITH the government and stop the inquiry from happening???
     
  8. There will be an inquiry in due course and it grows closer with each passing day, as the US embark on a very public U-turn in policy with a lot of the brown stuff flying around in the direction of those involved in Iraq.

    There was an interesting evidence session in front of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee yesterday. One of the draft "dodgy dossiers" (remember those) penned by a spin-doctor and ex-Mirror hack by the name of John Williams is still classified Secret and has not been released despite FoI requests (can't be long before it is leaked anyway :D ). This can of worms has quite a few juicy ones left in it. :twisted:

    http://www.newstatesman.com/200611130062
     
  9. Blair's plan is obviously to have the inquiry when he has left office and Br00n can wipe his hands of it, but the longer Blair hangs on the more damage he does. Double edged sword really. Difficult to see how Br00n can claim innocence, he suported the war all along. I am sure he will try though.
     
  10. I consider that the ' "politicisation" of the diplomatic service' and that now we have had questionable National Elections in mainland UK as the ywo disgraceful matters that must be rememberd as 'Blairs Legacy'.
    john
    As for the 'promotion depended on agreeing with ministers, most specifically Mr Blair.' words fail me. The Brit Civil Service was one of the cuntries Greatest Assests.
     
  11. "UK Iraq policy a rank disaster"

    Thanks a lot for pointing that out to us, BBC. I'm pretty sure it escaped everbody's attention.
     
  12. Err Crabby, it was a high ranking former diplomat who said it. one of those who did not get on because he was off message at the time. BBC are just reporting how the diplomatic service has been politicised along with the rest of civil service and the intelligence service and the attorney general.

    A high ranking British diplomat, who quit over the war with Iraq, has called policy in the region a "rank disaster".
    Carne Ross told MPs the intelligence presented to the public about weapons of mass destruction was "manipulated".

    He also added that "the proper legal advice from the Foreign office on the legality of the war was ignored".
     
  13. Exactly which dodgy dossier is this - is it the one signed off by the JOINT Intelligence Committee, the ones endorsed by the Intelligence services???


    Oh, and since You don't apparently know why rebel Labour MPs who were to support the early day motion actually didn't, I'll tell You. It was because the Tories have begun to play party politics and supported said motion when they were supposedly wholeheartedly for the war
     
  14. . . . and I have heard several of them say that when they were wholeheartedly FOR, they were busy believing the porkies peddled by B'liar.
    That they've changed their minds since then is hardly an act f treachery, more like a blinding glimpse of the bleedin' obvious. If they're to be slagged for anything, it is for not waking up sooner.

    I was f*cking certain it was a put-up job well before march 18 2003 - and I didn't need access to classified material to figure it out!! B'liar and Dubya were strutting the stage like a right pair of Scallies. They might as well have been shouting "'Ey, Saddam - we're gonna rob your 'ouse, us!!"

    And if Tone has got more material stached away that should have seen the light earlier - I would not be one bit surprised: the little sh1t is such a stranger to the truth I wonder if he even knows who he really is from day to day. :x :x :x :x :x
     
  15. It really is beyond my understanding why any Politician 'Bare Face' lies, when they must know the facts will come out sooner or later.
    The 'Tonkin' incedent that led to the 'Exspansion' of Nam being a classic case.
    Bush/Blair must have know that there Lies would soon be exposed. Is their contempt for the World such that the truely believe they are unaccountable.
    john
    Sadam thought he answered to no one. Now he faces the Rope for relatively,' Minor' crimes, a few Hundred.
    What is the penalty for a War of Agression ?
    Oh and please no Yanks surfaceing saying 'Well just try cum and get him.'
    Ya'll give him up.