And yet oddly none of those events had anything like the impact of the past 7 years. Somehow, the right does fvcking the country in the ass so much more effectively.
The banking crisis had nothing to do with Kabour and, with hindsight and compared to what’s happened since, wasn’t that bad anyway.
I don’t really give a fvck about the wars tbh, but the Afghan campaign was plainly justified and the belief that Saddam had WMD was 100% genuine. Anyone calling Blair a war child is a mewling infant who should be denied the vote on the grounds of emotional immaturity. The problem with both campaigns is that we and the Americans weren’t prepared to commit fully and build new colonial structures to pacify and remake these countries over 50, perhaps 100 years.
Not that I’d vote on the basis of the foreign wars anyway; they didn’t adversely affect anyone I know. Knew a couple of guys who served in Basra but they seemed to have a jolly enough time ladding it up and beating the Americans at poker.
I enjoyed 2008 enormously and miss those days. But I struggle to see what difference Labour made. Or any administration really. Big changes happen regardless of who is in power. I don’t mind revenge voting when people or parties annoy me but that’s all it is. If you read the business and sports pages you’re reading 99% of what you need to know.
The problem with both campaigns is that we and the Americans weren’t prepared to commit fully and build new colonial structures to pacify and remake these countries over 50, perhaps 100 years.
Translation: We knew that Iraq would collapse into sectarian warfare without a strong dictator in charge but piled in anyway without the will or the means to do anything about it and ultimately caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis.
"New Labour" was run by authoritarian warmongers with no understanding of history. Starmer's Labour Party is completely different, more in the mould of a traditional Labour Party.
the blair government effectively renationalised physical rail infrastructure via Network Rail. And renationalised whichever one of Metronet and Tube Lines it was that went under.
Right call, NHS PFI works, electricity privatisation works, neither works with rail.
And carried out their plans to make unis non free, a result of an expansion they started which is now generally agreed to have been a mistake
Iraq war sh1t but no point even pretending any Tory government wouldn't have followed Bush to the letter (indeed their votes got it through following a big abour rebellion)
the more or less complete regeneration of the physical hospital estate was probably the single biggest achievement of the Blair government. Acute healthcare is essentially an industrial process. Plant and equipment matters very, very much indeed.
I think Iraq underlined that sometimes people like Saddam Hussein are like asbestos in the house. Not great that it's there but sometimes better to leave undisturbed as removal causes far worse problems. See also Mr Gadaffi
The Iraqi people are happier now than they were under Saddam. The Afghan people would. be happier than they’d been under the Taliban if we hadn’t bailed on them and let the Taliban win.
The Iraqi people are happier now than they were under Saddam.
Where happier means no reliable utilities and a reasonable chance of being caught up in a gunfight or bombing every time you leave the house assuming the local militia haven't already kicked in your front door and taken you away never to be seen again. Admittedly people disappearing happened under Saddam but less frequently and it generally wasn't a surprise for those who were abducted.
6
0
Yep, going to war on fraudulent grounds and thereby creating a humongous refugee problem was just swell.
0
0
the taxes for PE were SO much better. sadly i think that ship has sailed so no excuses for voting for them this time.
2
0
Like this?
D:Ream - Things Can Only Get Better (1993) (Official Video) - YouTube
3
0
L is for Labour. L is for lice.
3
0
Yeah the Afgan ,Iraq war and the 2008 Banking crash were sooo much better than now.
2
0
And yet oddly none of those events had anything like the impact of the past 7 years. Somehow, the right does fvcking the country in the ass so much more effectively.
3
0
The banking crisis had nothing to do with Kabour and, with hindsight and compared to what’s happened since, wasn’t that bad anyway.
I don’t really give a fvck about the wars tbh, but the Afghan campaign was plainly justified and the belief that Saddam had WMD was 100% genuine. Anyone calling Blair a war child is a mewling infant who should be denied the vote on the grounds of emotional immaturity. The problem with both campaigns is that we and the Americans weren’t prepared to commit fully and build new colonial structures to pacify and remake these countries over 50, perhaps 100 years.
Not that I’d vote on the basis of the foreign wars anyway; they didn’t adversely affect anyone I know. Knew a couple of guys who served in Basra but they seemed to have a jolly enough time ladding it up and beating the Americans at poker.
0
0
With all the spending of money that wasn’t there, the global financial crisis, all the wars and lies about them? Sure.
politicians are all the same m8. The only solution is less govt
0
0
Lol @ lAbOuR cAusEd tHe FinAnCIAL cRiSiS!!!
tHeY lEfT a NoTe!!! WAkE uP sHeEPLe!!!!
2
0
I enjoyed 2008 enormously and miss those days. But I struggle to see what difference Labour made. Or any administration really. Big changes happen regardless of who is in power. I don’t mind revenge voting when people or parties annoy me but that’s all it is. If you read the business and sports pages you’re reading 99% of what you need to know.
1
0
The problem with both campaigns is that we and the Americans weren’t prepared to commit fully and build new colonial structures to pacify and remake these countries over 50, perhaps 100 years.
Translation: We knew that Iraq would collapse into sectarian warfare without a strong dictator in charge but piled in anyway without the will or the means to do anything about it and ultimately caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis.
1
0
Still wouldn’t make it into a list of the fifty worst things done by the governments since 2010 HTH
1
0
"New Labour" was run by authoritarian warmongers with no understanding of history. Starmer's Labour Party is completely different, more in the mould of a traditional Labour Party.
0
0
‘New colonial structures’ Jesus
0
0
A left leaning Tory government would not have done much different to Blair in the early years it's true
He even finished privatising the railways for them
0
0
Yes. That was the problem with neoconservatism, a foreign policy concept I basically believe in.
It was never prepared properly to walk its own talk.
Nation building takes decades
0
0
the blair government effectively renationalised physical rail infrastructure via Network Rail. And renationalised whichever one of Metronet and Tube Lines it was that went under.
Right call, NHS PFI works, electricity privatisation works, neither works with rail.
2
0
And carried out their plans to make unis non free, a result of an expansion they started which is now generally agreed to have been a mistake
Iraq war sh1t but no point even pretending any Tory government wouldn't have followed Bush to the letter (indeed their votes got it through following a big abour rebellion)
National minimum wage good
The euro correctly held off
0
0
Nhs pfi works LOL
would the populations of these new colonial states be happy, laz?
0
0
yes it does and yes they would be
the more or less complete regeneration of the physical hospital estate was probably the single biggest achievement of the Blair government. Acute healthcare is essentially an industrial process. Plant and equipment matters very, very much indeed.
0
0
I think Iraq underlined that sometimes people like Saddam Hussein are like asbestos in the house. Not great that it's there but sometimes better to leave undisturbed as removal causes far worse problems. See also Mr Gadaffi
0
0
Heh. You can do anything on the never never laz. Like your gaffe.
0
0
the LTV on my house is under 40% you soppy fat khunt
0
0
The Iraqi people are happier now than they were under Saddam. The Afghan people would. be happier than they’d been under the Taliban if we hadn’t bailed on them and let the Taliban win.
1
0
“Starmer's Labour Party is completely different, more in the mould of a traditional Labour Party.”
a traditional Labour Party…that wants nothing to do with the Trade Union movement.
🥴🥴🥴
0
0
Things….can only get bitter
0
0
THEYRe happiEr n oW!
2
0
Laz's sojourn in HK gave him a compelling insight into the happiness of the man on the Baghdad Omnibus for sure.
0
0
I recall the similarities, many people preparing to vote for whoever would oust them.
0
0
The Iraqi people are happier now than they were under Saddam.
Where happier means no reliable utilities and a reasonable chance of being caught up in a gunfight or bombing every time you leave the house assuming the local militia haven't already kicked in your front door and taken you away never to be seen again. Admittedly people disappearing happened under Saddam but less frequently and it generally wasn't a surprise for those who were abducted.
0
0
Yep. They certainly had enforced happiness in HK from their new colonial masters!
0
0
Hang on so the Tories think we shouldn't vote labour because of something they did 20 years ago?
Sorry whilst I assess the Tories on their fook ups this week
0
0
The candidate is urged to read the question.
Join the discussion