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.

 

Blair Admits Iraq a Disaster

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted that Iraq was a disaster to Sir David Frost during an interview on the Al Jazzara English TV channel. He went on to say that Western forces have been powerless to stop the descent into violence. He stopped short of calling it a civil war though. Instead of admitting however, that the U.S. led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was to blame for plunging the country into all but civil war, he laid the blame on Al Qeada and Iran.
 



www.dailymail.co.uk
Iraq is a 'disaster' admits Blair
By TIM SHIPMAN Last updated at 12:14pm on 18th November 2006

Blair's most frank admission yet over the war in Iraq came during an interview on the new Al Jazeera English television channel with Sir David Frost

Tony Blair admitted that British intervention in Iraq has been a disaster last night - sending shockwaves through Westminster.

In his frankest admission about the war to date, Mr Blair admitted that Western forces have been powerless to stop the descent into violence.

The Prime Minister stopped short of accepting the blame for plunging Iraq to the brink of civil war - blaming instead the insurgent uprising that has killed 125 British troops.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


By all accounts this has caused a storm of outrage through Westminster. With this admission, I should start taking bets as to how long it will be before Mr. Blair will be forced from office. To his credit he didn't follow the we are making progress/stay the course lines used ad nauseam by the Bush administration. He at the very least admitted to the obvious. To his discredit, neither he, nor Bush can bring themselves to admit that their unprovoked and unnecessary invasion is the source of all the violence. Saddam Hussien may have been a bastard, but at the very least he held the country together. The U.S. and British forces are unable of holding a single city together.

Related News Links:
www.truthout.org

[edit on 18-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 09:13 PM
link   
When you contrast the optimistic predictions that were made three and a half years ago, and the reality as it has unfolded since, the disparity between could not be more stark.

Anybody who had taken 5 minutes studying the history of the Balkans from Tito to Kosovo could have told you what was going to happen in an equally divided, equally hostile and equally suppressed Iraq.

Take the weight of oppression off and all the resentments and cultural hatreds that have been brewing for centuries comes bubbling up right out of the mouth of hell. We saw it in the Balkans after the death of Tito...we saw it in Rwanda and we should have seen it coming in Iraq except that this administration believed its own propaganda.

The only thing that unties Iraqis now is hatred for America and how could it be otherwise? Yes we removed the tyrant, but we released the whirlwind.

And the pity of it all is any two bit student of history could have seen it coming.

I still think that Bush etal. have something on Tony Blair because that man has really blown it with his countrymen and he should have known better. Something besides blind ego made him go along for the ride.



posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   
I am about as liberal as they come but the Al Jazeera English channel? With a big member of english society interviewing him on this channel? That really bothers me. If this came through standard western channels like BBC or CNN or Fox (
before it'll be digitally edited and Bill O' Reily announces we need to invade London) I'd be fine with that and even happy at the admission but Al Jazeera? That really bothers me.



posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by CuriousSkeptic
If this came through standard western channels like BBC or CNN or Fox


Is CNN a better source?

Blair's 'Iraq disaster' interview provokes storm

Don't blame the news source.

News happens!


[edit on 18-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Is CNN a better source?

Blair's 'Iraq disaster' interview provokes storm

Don't blame the news source.


The CNN story seems to say something substantially different:



Blair did not use the words himself, but appeared to agree with the assessment of the interviewer Sir David Frost on Al-Jazeera's new English-language channel.



posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Thank you djohnsto77.


Sometimes the source does matter, that is what makes the ATSNN follow-up discussions so important.

Look around people, somewhere, between sources, is a glimpse of the truth.



posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Great find!


Blair obviously screwed up. The epilogue is damage control.

For those who are interested, here is a bit more of the CNN coverage:




CNN

British Prime Minister Tony Blair provoked a storm Saturday after apparently admitting that the invasion of Iraq by the United States and Britain was "a disaster." ...Blair did not use the words himself, but appeared to agree with the assessment of the interviewer Sir David Frost on Al-Jazeera's new English-language channel. ...Blair's Downing Street office insisted that the British leader's views had been misrepresented and that it was "disingenuous" to portray it as an admission, the UK's Press Association said.

During the interview, Frost suggested that the West's intervention in Iraq had "so far been pretty much of a disaster." ...Blair replied: "It has, but you see what I say to people is why is it difficult in Iraq? It's not difficult because of some accident in planning, it's difficult because there's a deliberate strategy -- al Qaeda with Sunni insurgents on one hand, Iranian-backed elements with Shia militias on the other -- to create a situation in which the will of the majority for peace is displaced by the will of the minority for war."

Opposition MPs seized on the comment as evidence that Blair has finally accepted that his strategy in the Middle Eastern state had failed.





.word - brain burp

[edit on 18-11-2006 by soficrow]



posted on Nov, 18 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   
People just wait for the follow up of denial and contradictions after this been in the news.

It seems that every time somebody in UK in political standing say something negative about Iraq is immediately followed by a series of excuses and apologies and misinterpretations



posted on Nov, 19 2006 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Is CNN a better source?

Blair's 'Iraq disaster' interview provokes storm

Don't blame the news source.


The CNN story seems to say something substantially different:



Blair did not use the words himself, but appeared to agree with the assessment of the interviewer Sir David Frost on Al-Jazeera's new English-language channel.





So since ALL news media are owned by people with vested interests one way or the other, it begs the question....who is more accurate? CNN or Al Jazzera, or should I say this was originally from a newspaper article; The Daily Mail? Also the choice of the words "appears to agree" seems more than a little odd....I would think that he would either agree or disagree. I guess the only way to know is to watch the broadcast itself....I am sure there is a copy floating around somewhere. On youtube perhaps.

After looking around I couldn't find a film clip of the interview or a transcript...BUT the following quotes are from the original article that is the source for this thread...The Daily Mail.



[" Challenged by veteran interviewer Sir David Frost that the Western invasion of Iraq has "so far been pretty much of a disaster", Mr Blair said: "It has."

The Prime Minister went on: "You see what I say to people is why is it difficult in Iraq? It's not difficult because of some accident in planning, it's difficult because there's a deliberate strategy - al Qaeda with Sunni insurgents on one hand, Iranian-backed elements with Shia militias on the other - to create a situation in which the will of the majority for peace is displaced by the will of the minority for war."

"We are not walking away from Iraq," he said. "We will stay for as long as the government needs us to stay.

"And the reason for that is that what is happening in Iraq, as in Afghanistan, as elsewhere in parts of the Middle East, is a struggle between the decent majority of people, who want to live in peace together, and those who have an extreme and perverted and warped view of Islam, who want to create war.

"In those circumstances, our task has got to be to stand up for the moderates and the democrats against the extremists and the sectarians. They are testing our will at the moment, and our will has not to be found wanting." ]


P.S. Those are the exact quotes from the article in sequence dealing with Iraq...he goes on to discuss Iran and Syria, but these are the quotes on Iraq that were published in the press.
Of course Downing Street has already issued its denials.

[edit on 19-11-2006 by grover]

[edit on 19-11-2006 by grover]

[edit on 19-11-2006 by grover]



posted on Nov, 19 2006 @ 09:08 AM
link   
.

Blair is not alone on this one. But Bush may be.




Embittered insiders turn against Bush: War advocates, other conservatives say president mismanaged their vision

Forty-three months later, the cakewalk looks more like a death march, and Adelman has broken with the Bush team. He had an angry falling-out with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this fall. He and Cheney are no longer on speaking terms. And he believes that "the president is ultimately responsible" for what Adelman now calls "the debacle that was Iraq."

Adelman, a former Reagan administration official and onetime member of the Iraq war brain trust, is only the latest voice from inside the Bush circle to speak out against the president or his policies. Heading into the final chapter of his presidency, fresh from the sting of a midterm election defeat, Bush finds himself with fewer and fewer friends. Some of the strongest supporters of the war have grown disenchanted, former insiders are registering public dissent and Republicans on Capitol Hill blame him for losing Congress.

Most troubling, he said, are his shattered ideals: "The whole philosophy of using American strength for good in the world, for a foreign policy that is really value-based instead of balanced-power-based, I don't think is disproven by Iraq. But it's certainly discredited."




new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join