It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Very strange, but quite in keeping with the general LibDem irrelevance.
Originally posted by Ste2652
Any idea if the debate after the speech was recorded and is available to view online?
How do you feel about this year's speech, and how do you feel about the ceremony in general? Is it outdated and extravagant, or is it part of our national character, tradition and heritage?
Originally posted by Liberal1984
When the House of Commons recently voted against an inquiry into Iraq the War
Is what’s being done for the environment enough when both the Tories and the LibDems are demanding annual carbon targets.
I thought the government went through a phrase of being quite keen on targets
so to have the Tories and the LibDems join them on their own turf should surely have welcomed and not rejected?
However the Gov has made the commitment and explicitly stated that when the war is over there will be a full formal inquiry
They may come eventually but for now reputable and proper independent review is judged to be the better and more productive approach (so as to keep this from becoming diverted into becoming yet another political football).
Tory leader David Cameron's decision to vote for an immediate inquiry into the Iraq war was "absolutely crazy", a former party defence spokesman says.
Quentin Davies, who abstained from Tuesday's vote, said Tory credibility would be damaged if people thought the party had done a U-turn on the war.
Tory MPs were told at the last minute to back an unsuccessful SNP and Plaid Cymru motion for an immediate inquiry......
......But Mr Davies added the credibility of the party as an alternative government would be seriously damaged if it gave the impression of "cynically" shifting with the prevailing party political wind.
Another senior Conservative who was absent from the crucial vote - but who declined to be named - described Mr Cameron's decision as "intellectually and morally indefensible".
The MP suggested a number of Tory MPs were deliberately absent.
Originally posted by Liberal1984
why are additional British troops lives going to be endangered by a public inquiry into the war?
My belief is that the Resistance would (if anything) have more and not less respect if we reviewed the actions we’ve committed in their country.
whatever difference a British government inquiry did make would be so small it would almost be incalculable.
wasn’t it Thatcher who did more than anybody to lessen our reliance on dirty coal?
claims about gaining enemy "respect" have to be some of the most ludicrous comments you've made here yet!
www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2006/10/31/ucommons5001.xml Earlier, Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, warned that a defeat for the Government would undermine British troops and send a dangerous signal to the insurgents.
"What happens in this House today will be heard and not only by those in Iraq, the people and the government, but also will be heard by those whose intention it is to do us harm, whether it be in Iraq or beyond," she said.
"I ask the House whether it is the time to send a signal which many will undoubtedly, and every Member in this House knows this in their heart to be true, interpret as a signal which is a weakening of our commitment."
And to be honest though it would probably make a positive difference to how we are perceived; whatever difference a British government inquiry did make would be so small it would almost be incalculable.
a full-scale public enquiry in the British sense means openly revealing for eventual publication huge amounts of operational and its supporting information that is currently kept secret (including comprehensive descriptions of the methods, resources and strategy).
Originally posted by Liberal1984
Talk of gaining enemy respect is crazy; sadly its no longer a ludicrous issue to raise given that the argument was used by our foreign secretary Margaret Becket
of not undermining insurgent respect for us
What sort of “comprehensive descriptions of the methods, resources and strategy” would be revealed in a public inquiry?
Because yes if a British public inquiry means publicising this sort of information (or similar) then I agree we should never have a British public inquiry into the military.
But only if your saying there is no way of censoring British public inquiries on reasonable grounds of national security
If so our public inquiries suck.
Anyway Sminkey you’re the one who is saying militarily sensitive information would have to be made public. Is there anyway you could confirm with us public inquires cannot be censored on grounds of national security?
And if this is true would you agree that the structure for public inquiries into the military has to change?
I note too that you cannot provide a direct quote to back your claim some other MP actually mentioned enemy respect
was my way of summing up their argument.
Other Labour MP’s also used the argument “of not undermining insurgent respect for us” to propel their argument against a government inquiry.
news.bbc.co.uk... The prime minister's spokesman has insisted to concede such an investigation now, or to defeat the government, would send out a message of weakness to terrorists and insurgents in Iraq
whatever difference a British government inquiry did make would be so small it would almost be incalculable.
- Lib if you really don't even know what a full scale open British Parliamentary public enquiry entails and is, then perhaps it is down to you to find out what it is that you are calling so loudly for and finding so completely essential, hmmmmm?
full-scale public enquiry in the British sense means openly revealing for eventual publication huge amounts of operational and its supporting information that is currently kept secret (including comprehensive descriptions of the methods, resources and strategy).
why don't you just admit you did not and still do not really understand what a British public full Parliamentary enquiry is?
a full-scale public enquiry in the British sense means openly revealing for eventual publication huge amounts of operational and its supporting information that is currently kept secret (including comprehensive descriptions of the methods, resources and strategy).
You can't call for a full public enquiry and then ask for the bits that don't suit you and cause you problems to not be open and public.
Originally posted by Liberal1984
Personally I am hugely eager to learn how a public inquiry now will damage British national security more than one in the future (and after of course the mistakes have been made).
I would really like to learn a few specific examples of how and why a public enquiry into the circumstances of this war will damage our security
But I'm not suggesting the bits that don’t suit my opinion shouldn’t be published. I'm suggesting we can have a public enquiry with the bits that expose militarily sensitive information being withheld.
And unless this was clearly abused I would be very surprised if the opposition won much public support for campaigning that classified military information should be publicised.
Anyway if you can be specific in showing how an enquiry would damage our security then I might come close to agreeing with you (again).
Not least because by governing with support (on the back of a slightly less well informed public) soldiers will die (possibly because of decisions our government shouldn’t really be taking at all).