Current Affairs The next Tory (strong and stable) leader is Boris Johnson

[Blues Harp]

A Blairite candidate would have my vote.

More wishywashy liberal sdp, chuka crap then......? War criminals rule yes?

 

[The binman chronicles]

More wishywashy liberal sdp, chuka crap then......? War criminals rule yes?

The weakness of the Labour party as it stands is going to allow a chancer like Boris to be PM. I would take the war criminals in this case.

Speaking about the war it is easy with hindsight to say it was wrong but it is a bit more difficult at the time. I would perhaps naively think America would stand shoulder to shoulder with us if something that horrific every occurred on our soil. It perhaps ment that things were rushed and too eager to agree, but no one went in there thinking they wouldn't find anything. How do I know this? Because they would have had chance to plant some evidence in that case! Just cause we say Blairite or centrist doesn't instantly mean they are war mongers, the invasion of Iraq passed with a massive majority in the HoC, with only 2 Tories voting against it.

And if we say Britain stayed out of the Iraq war and even prevented it from happening, there are no guarantees that Hussein wouldn't have then been emboldened to get WMD or allow and fund displaced Al Qaeda from Afghanistan. That could have led to massive terrorist atrocities with mass casualties in the UK at a later date due to inaction. It's unlikely, but not so out there that it is impossible.

Bout time we stopped worrying about a war that has been and gone and was born from an impossible choice driven by completely unforeseen circumstances and start worrying about stopping the UK going to hell in a handcart.

 

[Zezti]

 

[summerisle]

 

[Blue 1]

There seem to be an awful lot of people out there who would vote for Boris Johnson despite the likelihood that his leadership will have them barbequeing rats over an oil-drum brazier for dinner underneath a flyover in no time at all. We've lost the bleedin' plot when anyone could consider this fella fit for the highest office in the land.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

I would perhaps naively think America would stand shoulder to shoulder with us if something that horrific every occurred on our soil.

Very very naïve, can't think of an occasion where America (Administrations) have stood by us without certain conditions or circumstances first being met.

Second world War Suez Canal or Falklands, they have ignored our blight or joined in only when economically beneficial for themselves and then extreme circumstances have compelled them..

Of course they talk bigly. Yaphank..

They went wobbly over Middle East because of economic interest in first Iraq war and taking Saddam out completely...

It's rather worrying UK people sill have rose tinted view of our relationship with America..

There seem to be an awful lot of people out there who would vote for Boris Johnson despite the likelihood that his leadership will have them barbequeing rats over an oil-drum brazier for dinner underneath a flyover in no time at all. We've lost the bleedin' plot when anyone could consider this fella fit for the highest office in the land.

Not heard of one person in real life supporting Boris Johnson, plenty of risable comments. However lots of support in media and online, strangely. Are they the same thing?

 

[The binman chronicles]

Very very naïve, can't think of an occasion where America (Administrations) have stood by us without certain conditions or circumstances first being met.

Second world War Suez Canal or Falklands, they have ignored our blight or joined in only when economically beneficial for themselves and then extreme circumstances have compelled them..

Of course they talk bigly. Yaphank..

They went wobbly over Middle East because of economic interest in first Iraq war and taking Saddam out completely...

It's rather worrying UK people sill have rose tinted view of our relationship with America..



Not heard of one person in real lifesupporting Boris Johnson, plenty of risable comments. However lots of support in media and online, strangely. Are they the same thing?

Our 'special' relationship you could say only really started after the Korean war and has been building since. Beforehand they still had mistrust and saw us as a genuine rival with our empire. It's not like we got involved in every war they fighting, so why would they with us? Besides they didn't need to get involved in stuff such as Falklands as it was completely in hand and can't be classified in the same ball park as what happened on 9/11 which was an attack on all western democracies.

I'm not saying it is perfect, because it is not and because of the slug of the recent wars where the outcome has been less than positive, the thought of fighting another might be too much, so if something like this happened again within 10 years they might not do the same and that is the same for both. But in the lead up to Afghanistan and Iraq there hadn't been a war like that since Vietnam so the passing of time would have helped people buy into it more than they would now.

I don't think you are providing a balanced viewpoint.

 

[DanEFC92]

 

[peteblue]

I don’t remember Channel 4 asking the same type of question regarding Brown being appointed PM.......

 

[DanEFC92]

I don’t remember Channel 4 asking the same type of question regarding Brown being appointed PM.......

Be a bit weird if you did remember a news channels line of questioning on a subject 12 years ago.

 

[orchard]

I don’t remember Channel 4 asking the same type of question regarding Brown being appointed PM.......

But i did point out to you that bj was vocal in objecting to that transition.

 

[peteblue]

But i did point out to you that bj was vocal in objecting to that transition.

Who believes any politician......

 

[peteblue]

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Old, white and male you say?

 

[Jib in lad]

Our next Prime Minister.....

​