It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


REGIME CHANGE (in the uk)

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 12:19 PM
One of the more interesting long term issues of a war against Iraq is the position of Tony Blair as Prime Minister of the UK.
Currently polls are regulally showing 80% of Britons against war.Around 50% of Britons polled stated that they did not trust Bush and felt that oil was the real motive for war.
Most Britons feel sick and ashamed of their Prime Ministers lack of intregrity.Remember this is the Prime Minister who wanted an ethical foreign policy when he came to power.
Around 50% of Labour back benchers are likely to either rebel against the whip or resign from the parliamentary whip altogether if Blair goes to war without a second UN resolution.At least 2 ministers will resign from government.Around 70% of Labour party members disagree with war many are likely to resign their membership to an already cash strapped Labour Party.
We may all find that regime change may not only be confined to Iraq.The consequences of ignoring the population and party will almost certainly rebound on Blair and the next Prime Minister will make a point of distancing himself from any Bush Administration.

These are only ideas.Please feel free to comment if you agree and wish to add something or if you disagree then give a reason.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 02:43 PM
Tony Blair isn't

1) Using WOMD on his own constituents!

2) Breaking agreements he agreed to in UN resolutions.

3) Trying to launch a holy war against the West.

We could go on, but it isn't really necessary....

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 02:50 PM
I'm glad you're not going to go on.I'd much rather you explained the three points you've already made.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 03:26 PM
excuse my ignorance of the parlimentary system...

?doesn't he (Blair) have to get permission from parliment to send troops and money off to Iraq--aren't GB's branches of government equal?

it would seem that if the public as a majority is against the GB's involvement in a war in Iraq then the government, being representative of the people, would try to get in line with the peoples views. That's the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship or a republic.

at any rate...i was led to believe (by US media and BBC World) that most of the GB's citizens wanted the ouster of Saddam, favored regime change, and fully backed the war plans. where are your polls coming from as opposed to the reports we are getting over here?

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 03:39 PM
SKY news and channel 4 news and a BBC daytime program have held polls recently which come out with the majority against war in Iraq. I don`t think most poeple disagree with the war in prinicple they just want some hard evidence and a proper UN mandate

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 05:21 PM
Thankyou Cassini.Add to that a recent poll in The Times newspaper.Britons are not anti-American but are vehemently anti-Bush.
Unfortunately the UK does not have a written constitution and the responsibilities of government are often blured.Parliament has not been allowed to vote on the issue of war with Iraq.because it is not inevitable and so our parliamentary democracy is once again disabled by spin.Parliament will only be allowed to vote when(excuse my French)a Fait Acompli(Why did I not pay attention at school)has taken place and parliamentarians are made to feel guilty about not backing British soldiers.
It matters not,Blair will not be re-elected as Prime Minister if he ignores overwelming public opinion.And this May's local elections will show increased support for the Liberal party in the UK.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 05:24 PM
Just wanted to say Cassini.That when I said a regular 80% I mean't without a second UN resolution,

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 05:35 PM
Who cares.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 05:40 PM
MT69 got nothing worth saying keep it to yourself

with ya JB1

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 05:51 PM
Congratulations MT69.That two sillible response goes towards your post counter.If you keep on going at this rate you'll be a Mod in no time.DEEeeere!Oh Yes,I forgot,Your posts have to have some relevence.

Curently US public support (according to C4 news)is running at 40% unconditionally, but 60% with British support.So Who cares?

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:13 PM
John bull - You surf the internet looking for polls of uneducated people giving their opinion on the war. Wow, you're such bigtime journalist.

Oh, you never answered my question about the ribbon you're displaying here. Some joke about the military???

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:17 PM
I`m sure John Bull does n`t need me defending him but since i mentioned the polls as well, they come from good sources not even from the internet, theres been plenty in the papers, TV and even the net for a while on this.

Its not really much of an arguement to start attacking something like that, your not still at school are you?

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:18 PM
I agree for all of the above but also,

because the govt is soft on the causes of crime and tough on the victims of crime.

We work longer hours than ever but get lower wage increases, higher taxes and receive third world public services.

The rich continue to get (obscenely)richer, the rest of us just stay the same.

The law abiding are penalised while the anti-social, the lazy and the sociopathic are excused from their actions.

Regime change! We need another peasants revolt.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:24 PM
Still in school???

As for the British polls, their country must be getting dumber by the minute if they believe Saddam is innocent. Blair has sided with Bush because he's been given our information IMO since they're our #1 ally.

The man on the street in London has no clue about what the CIA has on Saddam, but of course we need to pay attention to his UNEDUCATED opinion because john bull found it on the internet....probably at the same place john bull found his ribbon.

[Edited on 18-1-2003 by MT69]

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:25 PM

Originally posted by Saphronia
...doesn't he (Blair) have to get permission from parliment to send troops and money off to Iraq--aren't GB's branches of government equal?

The British Prime minister has something called The Queens Prerogative. This means two things.

1) Hes allowed to have temper tantrums and wear shoes with unfeasibly high heals.

2) He can send the country to war without a parliamentary vote.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:35 PM
MT69,You ask why I have a ribon as my avatar?

If you had been with the board longer than a fortnight you would know.

But dispite that I hope you may take a deep breath,stop being beligerent,and start contributing to this site.

FM will tell you that on this board we are willing to start again.So start again!You may wish to troll here for ever more but I can assure your opinions will become irrelevent.You appear ,not,to be stupid.You appear to have interesting views.Why spoil it with childish responses.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:38 PM
Congrats on winning your ribbon here. I guess you got it for talking trash about the USA and finding various left-wing conspiracy links.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 06:39 PM
of the real people (not the 56 handpicked employees of FOX network & news) shows overwhelmingly that the American people are AGAINST the WAR without just cause.

Yes, Saddam is a pig.

Yes, he may have much to hide.

Yes, he probably gave monetary & possibly even training support to Taliban/AlQuida operatives

Yes, he shared intelligence with Taliban/AlQuida

We all know that this dirtbag should be ousted but do we not have a constitutional directive to not get involved in the politics of other countries. We must allow the Iraqi people to make this decision, and if they require support I'm sure we'd be glad to help them and reap the OILY benefits


Is what shrub is doing a legitimate and legal attack upon another soveriegn power?

How would we feel if a foriegn power took it upon themselves to invade America with the intent of "assisting" the American people in the overthrow of our govt, to free us from our tyrany under shrub?

As much as I can't stand the dork I'd still take offense to another country taking such actions against my country. Would you not also feel this same way?

This is not the Allies liberating France in WW2 folks, we will not, regardless of our intent, be welcomed as the conquering heroes by the Iraqi people. They will fight us hand-to-hand in the streets to the last standing Iraqi to protect their country, just as we would.

So what the hell are we doing this for? Will this bring back the victims of 9-11? NO!!! Will it make the Muslim world quake with fear? NO!!! It will probably spur them onto even more monstrous acts of violence against the US and other western nations!!

So why then? Well, like it or not we're doing it for shrubs friends and business partners at SHELL, AMOCO, BP, EXON, GULF and ARCO. You know, most of the braindead red necks he has in his cabinet posts?

Please wake up and stop beating your nationalist chest and realize that fine young Americans are going to die by the thousands so you can continue to gas up your HUMMER at a $1.50 a gallon or so. Here in Cali its more like $1.89 but hey, whatever right?

I for one don't feel gassing up my GMC is worth their young lives, and don't forget those who survived the bullets and bombs in the 1991 gulfwar, came home sick and were told it was a psychosis but in fact we know now it was from chemical/biological agents and the depleted uranium rounds used by the US against the Iraqi tanks... the same DU that has caused birth defects and infant deaths in both gulfwar vets kids and in the Iraqi's as well.

So nationalist pride aside, look at this with an objective - not a jaundiced - eye. Don't accept the shrubs reasoning out of hand (mainly since he's devoid of any ability to reason rationally or the use of any amount of common sense for that matter).

Close your mouth, open your eyes and ears and listen to what is actually being said by all sources, please don't rely on the skewed views of FOX or MSNBC/CNBC or the rest of these conservative talking heads!!!

Make your voice heard and don't let group think rule your head or your heart. Bravery is also knowing when you should say STOP!!! It still says "WE, THE PEOPLE..." not "WE THE CORPORATE WEENIES..."!!!


[Edited on 18-1-2003 by USMC Harrier]

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 07:13 PM
Texas Tea?That's oil to you and me!

The one major consolation in the last week has been polls showing 50% against war in the US.
I hate Bush.but does that make me anti-American?I am British.I remember a German girl once describing the shame not for herself but for her grandparents.I feel this would be a war of aggresion.and if a British Prime Minister backed a US led war then he would bring shame on all Britons.

posted on Jan, 17 2003 @ 07:18 PM
Well last i heard the US is not jumping to arms about these Shells rocket war heads ..what ever they are.. Yet i do not hear any one saying any thing about that....

As for Tony Blair..while i am not up to speed on the political parties in the UK..from other forums i have been reading..(ie mostly the fire fighter ones) He is losing face with his domistic agenda..Sounds like he is in hot water as it is..


new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in