Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Are the Generals revolting?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...682807,00.html

This follows on from a lot of senior US military types who are rather aghast at what Bush is doing with their armed forces.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Although I might agree with General Sir Michael Rose, I'm not really sure what his qualifications to demand an impeachment are, and nothing he has said is really new.

As long as there is apathy from the voting (or, more to the point, non-voting) public then nothing will happen. We all knew the facts when we went into the last general election - yet we still voted Blair back in. That tells me that either the public supported action in Iraq, they can't be bothered to find out the facts about action in Iraq or they are not bothered full stop.

So whilst ex-SAS commanders might pontificate about their own political views - nothing will happen unless the public sit up and take notice.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Also here

And how many people killed, kidnapped, maimed etc?

Personally I'd love it to happen here and in the US but sadly can't see it ever happening. :(

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

The way the election system works, that can hardly be called an endorsement, but the fact remains that enough of the people who voted were happy to overlook some of the issues, it would seem.

And the ones that didn't vote? Well, if they did have a point of view, then that was the time to be heard.
Let's for a moment assume that every single person against also voted, and then presumably voted against the current government.

That means that those not opposed to the war and/or in support of the government still must have out-numbered them.

And hence we have the government chosen by a majority - as democracy requires. The fact that this 'majority' is not representative of the whole of the population is down to electoral apathy.
If the public can't be bothered to get out there and make their mark, then they should also accept the result.

So I personally think any 'groundswell' of opposition to the government ought to reflect on their inaction at the last election, and maybe resolve to be counted next time. Maybe then I'd be interested in their complaints.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

He also said that if it has him, he would not have led his troops into a war he disagreed with. Newflash, but generals are not intitled to allow their personal convictions to interfere with there work

When you join the army you and at the disposal of the Goverment. You are not allowed to choose your wars.

Impeachment has already failed once because there has been no proof that the goverment knew that Iraq did not have WMD. It only was discovered that their was not, that is not a lie unless the goverment knew before hand

---------- Post added at 11:17 ---------- Previous post was at 11:12 ----------

Also, Just because he a a formal General does not make his opinion more valuible than anyone else. He was not to do with this war and hence has about as much say as you, me or anyone else

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

You mean his armed forces...

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

No, They voted for the party they voted for. A vote that did not go to labour is not exactly a vote against labour. If it was a two party system then the result may have been different but its not.

It was not Labour vs Not Labour

It was Labour vs Tory, Lib Dem, Greens, ukip, BNP and so on.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Yeah right...

It would have been under Proportional Representation, but in practice, this country has a 2.5 party system. If you think otherwise, you are deluding yourself.

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

It also wasn't a referendum. There were several issues and I didn't make my choice based on the war (esp. seeing the two main parties both supported it)

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

The voting system may need a change, I was simply pointing out that vote not for labour was not therefor a vote against labour.

Its the same stupid logic in the US where the Democrates think that 3rd party candidates are stealing their votes :rolleyes:

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Fair enough, and good point :)

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Cheers, I would like a Proportional Representation system but I do not think it would work. A small party would hold a balance of powerO

One idea i liked was keep the current system and every general election the Lords seats are decided by Proportional Representation, I.E If labour get 54% of the vote, they choose 54% of the lords and so on.

Under that system the lord would be a lot harder for labour under the current election results as they would have less power in the lords. This way the winning party can have a majority and get policys though but the lords will ensure that if it was a small win it will be harder.

Anyway this is off-topic....

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

I know how the electoral system works.

I was not saying that it was a vote of confidence in Labour, but at the same time, you cannot protest against the party in government AND vote for them, if you actually want to get a message across to them. (Unless the message is "do what you like, I'll vote for you anyway.")

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

Sorry, I misunderstood your post. I agree with you on that

Re: Impeach Blair now says limp-wristed do-gooder leftie, er, former SAS General
 

That is how it should be - voting on a single issue is just daft.

I know that often between the parties and the media they try to make it look like a referendum/vote of confidence, but it is up to the electorate to look past the single issue.

---------- Post added at 11:48 ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 ----------

That is the argument that is often brought forward against a PR system.

It's true that is is possible that a minority party could hold the balance of power, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing, nor is it inevitable.

---------- Post added at 11:52 ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 ----------

Sound like a fudge to me. A way to pretend we have PR, without having it.

If we had PR, we wouldn't need the Lords at all...
Not at all - the suggestion of impeaching an encumbent PM is about government and democracy.

As is everything we've talked about so far.