Compare and Contrast: Blair's Changing Values[sic]
Posted August 4th, 2006 by ringverse
in
During the build up to war in Iraq...
Tony Blair, Speech 25th Feb 2003:
To those who say we are rushing to war, I say this. We are now 12 years after Saddam was first told by the UN to disarm; nearly 6 months after President Bush made his speech to the UN accepting the UN route to disarmament; nearly 4 months on from Resolution 1441; and even now today we are offering Saddam the prospect of voluntary disarmament through the UN.
To those who say we are rushing to war, I say this. We are now 12 years after Saddam was first told by the UN to disarm; nearly 6 months after President Bush made his speech to the UN accepting the UN route to disarmament; nearly 4 months on from Resolution 1441; and even now today we are offering Saddam the prospect of voluntary disarmament through the UN.
I detest his regime. But even now he can save it by complying with the UN's demand. Even now, we are prepared to go the extra step to achieve disarmament peacefully.
I do not want war. I do not believe anyone in this House wants war. But disarmament peacefully can only happen with Saddam's active co-operation.
Fast Forward to this week...
Tony Blair, Speech 1st August 2006:
The reason I say our response was even more momentous than it seemed at the time, is this. We could have chosen security as the battleground. But we didn't. We chose values. We said we didn't want another Taleban or a different Saddam. Rightly, in my view, we realised that you can't defeat a fanatical ideology just by imprisoning or killing its leaders; you have to defeat its ideas.
The reason I say our response was even more momentous than it seemed at the time, is this. We could have chosen security as the battleground. But we didn't. We chose values. We said we didn't want another Taleban or a different Saddam. Rightly, in my view, we realised that you can't defeat a fanatical ideology just by imprisoning or killing its leaders; you have to defeat its ideas.
There are 21 instances of the word "values" this weeks LA speech, but curiously not one mention of "WMD"...
"Israel Tells Army to Push
"Israel Tells Army to Push Deeper in Lebanon to Destroy Arsenal"
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aplO2xzbhh5s&refer=home
My question is - what about Man Utd? It's just not fair.
Its the impossible demand
Its the impossible demand scenario, how could Saddam disarm his WMD when he had none?
Its exactly the same as Israel telling the Lebanese government that they must stop Hizbollah firing their rockets - impossible.
The saddness is that they know it's an impossible demand otherwise they would not make it, lest the other side complies and completely undermines the decisions already made for war.
I do hope that one day in the future these people will stand trial for the countless crimes against humanity they have committed.
They say the victors write
They say the victors write history. Blair will try it anyway.
Oddly enough, the most
Oddly enough, the most common football shirts I saw on Saturday were Arsenal ones. No wonder Iain Dale hates us, not only are we bin Laden's favourite team, sponsored by Emirates but now have the backing of Hizbollah. Stand by for the carpet bombing of Holloway.
The large number of Jewish supporters, including most of the board, might not be enough of a deterrent. I hope the new stadium has a built-in bunker.
It's also worth remebering
It's also worth remebering that Arsenal's great London rivals Tottenham go by the moniker of 'The Yids' around these parts. :)