[Politics] Worst PM since Thatcher

[Blue3]

Boris, Truss, May, Sunak none of these dangerous idiots would have been PM if it wasn’t for lucky Dave remember that he was a gambler who bet on 10 years of austerity keeping it going long after all of the economic research that allegedly supported the austerity push has been discredited. Widely touted statistical results were, it turned out, based on highly dubious assumptions and procedures – plus a few outright mistakes – and evaporated under closer scrutiny.
Lucky Dave only got to be PM through a very unlikely LibDem partnership under the pretext of a proportional referendum which as it turned out was rejected by the great British public Lucky Dave got away with that meanwhile Lucky Dave was busy using austerity to grind what public services were left further into the ground.
By the time of the next election Lucky Dave’s partnership with the LibDems was old hat but a new danger loomed large that of Labour so Lucky Dave had a cunning plan let’s give Scotland if thy ask for one a referendum on becoming an independent country, it worked a treat Scotland voted into power the only independence party standing and Labour lost all its power in Scotland meanwhile Lucky Dave was swept to power.
However on the horizon was good old man of the People little Nigel and UKIP which was gaining traction while not actually ever winning any seats they were taking chunks out of lucky Dave's future vote not to worry lucky Dave has a plan let’s finish UKIP once and for all a referendum on EU membership his luck finally ran out and as a result we had May, Boris, Truss, Sunak however as with all professional gambling Lucky Dave was never down about it you win some you loose some next time it’s all about the next time a completely unexpected return as foreign secretary has given Dave another chance and what a great time in history lucky Dave has reentered the game.
In my opinion no one comes close to Thatcher she was pure evil but Lucky Dave was incompetent a gambler who gambled our nation away so he gets my nomination as the worst PM since Thatcher.

 

[Brovion]

What was his role in the 'Dodgy Dossier' revelations and what did he know about the circumstances leading to the death of Dr David Kelly?

He was a smarmy git and he undoubtedly blotted his copybook towards the end, and yes, that whole Iraq and 'weapons of mass destruction' thing does count massively against him, but 'worst PM since Thatcher?' Come on! It's like having a poll for 'Worst Albion Manager since Clough' and voting for Chris Hughton.

I'm guessing most of his votes have come from jealous Tories who can't stand the fact that a Labour politician proved to be a competent, able and popular PM.

And I might add I was no particular fan of him as I was one of those who went off to support Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour party.

 

[TheJasperCo]

So you agree he isn't a war criminal?

Convicted war criminal? No, course not.

War criminal in the eyes of public opinion? Depends who you ask.

 

[TheJasperCo]

He was a smarmy git and he undoubtedly blotted his copybook towards the end, and yes, that whole Iraq and 'weapons of mass destruction' thing does count massively against him, but 'worst PM since Thatcher?' Come on! It's like having a poll for 'Worst Albion Manager since Clough' and voting for Chris Hughton.

I'm guessing most of his votes have come from jealous Tories who can't stand the fact that a Labour politician proved to be a competent, able and popular PM.

And I might add I was no particular fan of him as I was one of those who went off to support Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour

He was a smarmy git and he undoubtedly blotted his copybook towards the end, and yes, that whole Iraq and 'weapons of mass destruction' thing does count massively against him, but 'worst PM since Thatcher?' Come on! It's like having a poll for 'Worst Albion Manager since Clough' and voting for Chris Hughton.

I'm guessing most of his votes have come from jealous Tories who can't stand the fact that a Labour politician proved to be a competent, able and popular PM.

And I might add I was no particular fan of him as I was one of those who went off to support Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour party.

Can't say fairer than that tbh

 

[Baldseagull]

It's interesting that Major has zero votes, one of the arguments heard with regard to leaving the EU, was that it was too involved in areas of politics it should not have been, "it was fine when it was just a trading bloc". Most of those powers that the Tories Eurosceptics don't like came with the Maastricht treaty, which John Major signed us up to, and was when talk of a referendum, and the fact we hadn't had one even though it was now a different beast, started.
I would have thought a few leave supporters might have jumped on him for letting the EU have so much of the control they desperately wanted back in 2016.

 

[Motogull]

Technically, it will always be Cameron. Nearly enabled the break up of the union with Scotland, enabled the break up of the union with Europe and was the only PM ever to lose a vote on military action in parliament.

If honour and integrity is your bag, it has to be Johnson. Ghastly man.

If competency is your bag, it has to be Truss. Dangerous.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It's interesting that Major has zero votes, one of the arguments heard with regard to leaving the EU, was that it was too involved in areas of politics it should not have been, "it was fine when it was just a trading bloc". Most of those powers that the Tories Eurosceptics don't like came with the Maastricht treaty, which John Major signed us up to, and was when talk of a referendum, and the fact we hadn't had one even though it was now a different beast, started.
I would have thought a few leave supporters might have jumped on him for letting the EU have so much of the control they desperately wanted back in 2016.

My view is it got involved in the politics UK political parties did not want to bother....in a sense it outsourced looking after the cleanliness of water, food standards, medicine, employment rights etc and funded things no one else wanted to fund. I have spoken before about pulling out of the EMA.....to simply replicate the work of the EMA in the UK at a huge increased cost to the tax payer and to businesses who will simply pass the cost onto the UK. Utter nonsense which you will pay for. All previously outsourced with the added bonus of being as hands off, or as hands on, as you wanted. Going back to @Commander 's post it's stuff like this which the vast majority of people did not have a clue about and which will ultimately hit them with the extra cost and delays in approval. This is not necessary a delay in the UK MHRA licensing drugs...it's by companies not bothering to initially submit to the UK which is what is now happening.

 

[Commander]

But Blair didn't commit a war crime unless you have some evidence no one else has been able to consider.

I don’t think people deal in actual facts in politics though, do they?

The parroted ‘BLiar war criminal’ line from the right wing press (who let’s not forget were bang up for it at the time) is constantly repeated by people who have absolutely nothing to back it up with, have no understanding of the law on war crimes, and who conveniently forget that the Tories would have done exactly the same if they’d have been in charge at the time.

It’s no different to the ‘all Tories are evil baby eaters’ and being unable to agree with a single Tory policy, regardless of what it is, from the other side.

Basically tribalistic bollocks, as 99% of politics is these days.

 

[Biscuit]

Technically, it will always be Cameron. Nearly enabled the break up of the union with Scotland, enabled the break up of the union with Europe and was the only PM ever to lose a vote on military action in parliament.

If honour and integrity is your bag, it has to be Johnson. Ghastly man.

If competency is your bag, it has to be Truss. Dangerous.

I agree with every word of this.

All terrible in their own way, but only one of them did the unthinkable. The one rule you don't break. You never, ever put party ahead of country like David Cameron did. The worst PM in British history as a result.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But that's my point - how could he, when he'd nailed his colours to the pro-EU mast? I can't actually think of a decent analogy, but I'm sure there is one. I still maintain he would've been forced out anyway within months of he'd carried on.

I think it was the flippant way he left. The whole thing was like some sixth form wheeze at Eton, involving betting with someone else's money, that went wrong, There was no honour in it.

 

[Zeberdi]

I don’t think people deal in actual facts in politics though, do they?

The parroted ‘BLiar war criminal’ line from the right wing press (who let’s not forget were bang up for it at the time) is constantly repeated by people who have absolutely nothing to back it up with, have no understanding of the law on war crimes,

Rarely.

John Prescott Deputy Leader of the Labour Party

“Britain broke international law when it invaded Iraq in 2003”

John Morris - Labour Member of Parliament 1959-2001 and Attorney General 1997-1999

- Morris repeatedly warned Blair that a statement from the UN Security Council that Sadaam Hussein was in material breach of ceasefire agreements was an ‘essential precondition’ of going to war and that those conditions had not been met.

Kier Starmer QC - barrister at Doughty Street Chambers specialising in international human rights law. 2003

“Simply to argue that the interpretation of resolution 1441 accepted by all the other security council members except the US and the UK should be abandoned in favour of military action won't convince anybody. Flawed advice does not make the unlawful use of force lawful.”


I liked Blair a lot, he made Labour electable to a broad spectrum of the electorate but his war on Iraq was contrary to international law as it was not sanctioned by the UN Security Council. Blair acting on flawed advice from the US and going to war in Iraq severely damaged not just Blair’s political reputation (because he lied to Parliament saying the UN had authorised action) but the Labour Party too for years to come. ‘It obliterated much of the domestic record of a centre-left government and turned the dynamics of the Labour party after 2003 into a contest about how to view Blair, and the war.’

How Iraq war destroyed UK’s trust in politicians and left Labour in turmoil

Tony Blair’s decision to invade tore at successive Labour leaders and weakened the intelligence services

www.theguardian.com

Keir Starmer: Sorry, Mr Blair, but 1441 does not authorise force

Keir Starmer: The attorney general has a tricky task in defending the legal basis for war.

www.theguardian.com

Blair misled parliament over 1998 Iraq bombing, files show

Declassified documents from 1998, when the UK and US bombed Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, show Tony Blair was consistently informed military action was unlawful without UN authorisation. But he told parliament Britain had “the proper legal authority”.

www.declassifieduk.org

John Prescott: UK broke international law by invading Iraq in 2003

Prescott, as deputy prime minister, voted for the war – but now says Tony Blair stopped ministers fully discussing legality

www.theguardian.com

 

[Tubby Mondays]

I think it was the flippant way he left. The whole thing was like some sixth form wheeze at Eton, involving betting with someone else's money, that went wrong, There was no honour in it.

Thats exactly what is was like!

If went into Number 10 the morning after Brexit and said 'Well that didnt go as well as I hoped' (or words to that effect).

If him and Osborne were in politics for anything other than themselves were did they both eff off straight away when they had no power?!

Osborne then went to the Evening Standard for a wheeze and stiffed that.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Rarely.

John Prescott Deputy Leader of the Labour Party

“Britain broke international law when it invaded Iraq in 2003”

John Morris - Labour Member of Parliament 1959-2001 and Attorney General 1997-1999

- Morris repeatedly warned Blair that a statement from the UN Security Council that Sadaam Hussein was in material breach of ceasefire agreements was an ‘essential precondition’ of going to war and that those conditions had not been met.

Kier Starmer QC - barrister at Doughty Street Chambers specialising in international human rights law. 2003

“Simply to argue that the interpretation of resolution 1441 accepted by all the other security council members except the US and the UK should be abandoned in favour of military action won't convince anybody. Flawed advice does not make the unlawful use of force lawful.”


I liked Blair a lot, he made Labour electable to a broad spectrum of the electorate but his war on Iraq was contrary to international law as it was not sanctioned by the UN Security Council. Blair acting on flawed advice from the US and going to war in Iraq severely damaged not just Blair’s political reputation (because he lied to Parliament saying the UN had authorised action) but the Labour Party too for years to come. ‘It obliterated much of the domestic record of a centre-left government and turned the dynamics of the Labour party after 2003 into a contest about how to view Blair, and the war.’

How Iraq war destroyed UK’s trust in politicians and left Labour in turmoil

Tony Blair’s decision to invade tore at successive Labour leaders and weakened the intelligence services

www.theguardian.com

Keir Starmer: Sorry, Mr Blair, but 1441 does not authorise force

Keir Starmer: The attorney general has a tricky task in defending the legal basis for war.

www.theguardian.com

Blair misled parliament over 1998 Iraq bombing, files show

Declassified documents from 1998, when the UK and US bombed Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, show Tony Blair was consistently informed military action was unlawful without UN authorisation. But he told parliament Britain had “the proper legal authority”.

www.declassifieduk.org

John Prescott: UK broke international law by invading Iraq in 2003

Prescott, as deputy prime minister, voted for the war – but now says Tony Blair stopped ministers fully discussing legality

www.theguardian.com

Did Blair mislead? Yes.
Did this make the Iraq war illegal? No.
Was the Iraq war illegal? Maybe.
Do I care? No.

 

[drew]

Rarely.

John Prescott Deputy Leader of the Labour Party

“Britain broke international law when it invaded Iraq in 2003”

John Morris - Labour Member of Parliament 1959-2001 and Attorney General 1997-1999

- Morris repeatedly warned Blair that a statement from the UN Security Council that Sadaam Hussein was in material breach of ceasefire agreements was an ‘essential precondition’ of going to war and that those conditions had not been met.

Kier Starmer QC - barrister at Doughty Street Chambers specialising in international human rights law. 2003

“Simply to argue that the interpretation of resolution 1441 accepted by all the other security council members except the US and the UK should be abandoned in favour of military action won't convince anybody. Flawed advice does not make the unlawful use of force lawful.”


I liked Blair a lot, he made Labour electable to a broad spectrum of the electorate but his war on Iraq was contrary to international law as it was not sanctioned by the UN Security Council. Blair acting on flawed advice from the US and going to war in Iraq severely damaged not just Blair’s political reputation (because he lied to Parliament saying the UN had authorised action) but the Labour Party too for years to come. ‘It obliterated much of the domestic record of a centre-left government and turned the dynamics of the Labour party after 2003 into a contest about how to view Blair, and the war.’

How Iraq war destroyed UK’s trust in politicians and left Labour in turmoil

Tony Blair’s decision to invade tore at successive Labour leaders and weakened the intelligence services

www.theguardian.com

Keir Starmer: Sorry, Mr Blair, but 1441 does not authorise force

Keir Starmer: The attorney general has a tricky task in defending the legal basis for war.

www.theguardian.com

Blair misled parliament over 1998 Iraq bombing, files show

Declassified documents from 1998, when the UK and US bombed Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, show Tony Blair was consistently informed military action was unlawful without UN authorisation. But he told parliament Britain had “the proper legal authority”.

www.declassifieduk.org

John Prescott: UK broke international law by invading Iraq in 2003

Prescott, as deputy prime minister, voted for the war – but now says Tony Blair stopped ministers fully discussing legality

www.theguardian.com

But in spite of the above, GB was not sanctioned by the UN for the war and nobody was prosecuted because they are all interpretations of the law!!

As for getting the UN Security council to agree, that was never going to happen under any circumstances as Russia would have vetoed any resolution, as would have France. Had the UN been in existence pre 1939 then on your arguments the UK would have broken international law by declaring war on Germany as it wasn't an act of self defence 9we did it when they attacked Poland) and would never have been sanctioned by the UN as Russia, who had a pact with Hitler, would have vetoed any resolution for war.

Should we have gone to war, arguably not. However, had Michael Howard won the previous election does anyone genuinely think the Tories wouldn't have supported the US and done exactly the same as Blair.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Should we have gone to war, arguably not. However, had Michael Howard won the previous election does anyone genuinely think the Tories wouldn't have supported the US and done exactly the same as Blair.

Not that it alters your point greatly, the preceding election was in 2001 when the Conservatives were led by William Hague.

 

[drew]

Not that it alters your point greatly, the preceding election was in 2001 when the Conservatives were led by William Hague.

True, apologies. But you're right, Haque would also have done what the US were asking.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

I don’t think people deal in actual facts in politics though, do they?

The parroted ‘BLiar war criminal’ line from the right wing press (who let’s not forget were bang up for it at the time) is constantly repeated by people who have absolutely nothing to back it up with, have no understanding of the law on war crimes, and who conveniently forget that the Tories would have done exactly the same if they’d have been in charge at the time.

It’s no different to the ‘all Tories are evil baby eaters’ and being unable to agree with a single Tory policy, regardless of what it is, from the other side.

Basically tribalistic bollocks, as 99% of politics is these days.

Meanwhile in Scotland

Humza Yousaf ‘shocked’ by embezzlement charges against Peter Murrell

First minister of Scotland describes case as a ‘very serious and concerning matter’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Weststander]

It's interesting that Major has zero votes, one of the arguments heard with regard to leaving the EU, was that it was too involved in areas of politics it should not have been, "it was fine when it was just a trading bloc". Most of those powers that the Tories Eurosceptics don't like came with the Maastricht treaty, which John Major signed us up to, and was when talk of a referendum, and the fact we hadn't had one even though it was now a different beast, started.
I would have thought a few leave supporters might have jumped on him for letting the EU have so much of the control they desperately wanted back in 2016.

Major was a shocking PM in many ways. Hardly anyone was anti Europe at that time, as with the later Lisbon Treaty, arrogance from two PM’s in not putting seminal moments to the public, each would’ve been big wins. Sowing the seeds for huge anti EU sentiment.

Ken Clarke the sole bright spot, a great Chancellor.

 

[Weststander]

I’ve ever only heard the expression “Tony Bliar” from Blairite hating left wingers. Very widespread.

Some of whom I’m sure only did it from the late noughties onwards, when it became hip to describe 1997 to 2007 as wasted years under the Red Tories.

 

[drew]

You are completely missing the point I was making.

@Commander said the accusations that Blair’s war on Iraq was ‘illegal’ is an oft repeated line from the ‘right wing press’ by people who have ‘no understanding of international law’

My only point was that it wasn’t/isn’t - prominent Labour MPs have said/say the same, including the current Labour Opposition Leader and Blair‘s own Deputy at the time along with prominent international lawyers and the UN itself.. Therefore, arguments that Blair’s war on Iraq was ‘illegal’ is not a ‘right wing‘ media trope but a view widely held across the board and in the international community too whether you agree with that view or not …it’s disingenuous and unnecessarily partisan to suggest otherwise.

If it is as universal as you seem to suggest, why no action against him?

Also, I never claimed it was right wing trope but I was pointing out that the quotes you gave were all opinions as to whether it was in breach. If they were facts then surely something would have been done. However, what did the UN do? They, along with Russia, USA, EU actually made him a peace envoy!!! Don't recall them doing the same for Milosovic!!!