Posted on 04/13/2005 10:24:19 AM PDT by northmoor
Prior election day, British political Parties release "manifestos" or "platforms".
Blair on foreign policy -
=======
"We do not duck the tough choices...We made decisions because we believed them right - not because they were destined to be popular."
Chapter 7 of Labour's manifesto -
- "The best defense of our security is the spread of liberty and justice overseas."
- "We have worked closely with the US and other nations to combat the threat of terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq."
- "We need to be tough on terrorism and its causes."(Very Blairite, but very neo-conservative).
- "The threat of terrorism and the danger to British citizens is proven, not just by September 11th but by repeated attacks in Europe and around the world. So we cannot sit back and hope we will be unaffected. It is right that we do everything in our power to disrupt terrorist networks, and to challenge the conditions that help terrorism to breed."
- "We mourn the loss of life of innocent civilians and coalitions forces in the war in Iraq and the subsequent terrorism. But the butchery of Saddam is over and across Iraq, eight million people risked thier lives to vote earlier this year. Many people disagreed with the action we took in Iraq. We respect and understand their views. But we should all now unite to support the fledgling democracy in Iraq. British troops should remain in Iraq under a UN mandate as long as the democratically elected government there wants them."
- "We welcome the wider process of democratic reform across the Middle East, and we will work with our allies to encourage and promote economic and political change."
- "With Labour, a strong Britain will force international terrorism into retreat and help spread democracy and freedom around the world."
(Excerpt) Read more at image.guardian.co.uk ...
But he has, and I think the man deserves re-election. He has my vote.
I think I will stick to the Monster Raving Looney Party! :-)
http://www.omrlp.com/
translation - F... the voters.
I can't fault him on Iraq. Just everything else :0)
Blair's a good guy and a wonderful ally but there are some things I don't like about him.
1. He's pro-EU and favors integrating the UK with it. The EU seeks to eliminate all allies to the US in Europe, including the UK. If the UK ratifies the constitution, we could lose a good ally.
2. He's pro-Airbus and supports giving subsidies to it. This could be used to ban carriers such as British Airways from buying Boeing products in the future.
Again, many thanks to Blair, but I think I'll support the Conservative Party in this election as long as they are for the US. A lot of the Labour Party doesn't seem to be that way. We could use another Margaret Thatcher.
I don't think the EU seeks to eliminate allies to the US. It doesn't make sense for both the EU and US to be enemies to their biggest trading and investment partners.
But, but, Boy George said he wouldn't vote for Blair ever again!
When Spain approved the EU Constitution, they gloated that the UK would no longer be able to be an ally of the US.
Can you show me evidence for this, and why the Spanish ratification means the UK and US cannot be allies?
Agreed. Tony Blair is more Pro-US foreign policy than the Conservative party as a whole, but the Conservative party on the whole is much more supportive of the US than the Labour party. It is important to remember than without the votes of the Conservative party, Britain's Iraq war resolution would not have passed.
And the Conservatives are more pro-UK--they want to keep the Pound (which most British support and Blair does not) and they oppose the EU Constitution because it will destroy British sovereignty.
Come off it. The sun newspaper is a xenophobic comic. I would need a better source than them.
Erm, that's from The Sun. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't know the implications of that!
"It is important to remember than without the votes of the Conservative party, Britain's Iraq war resolution would not have passed"
That is not true. That is a common myth on FR. There was no need to rely on Tory votes.
The anti-war motion on March 19, 2003 was defeated in the Commons by 396 votes to 217, a majority of 179. There are currently 162 Conservative Members of Parliament in the House of Commons.
So, how did Blair have to rely on Conservative votes?
As for the EU. I think it will be far better for Britain to be in the EU and have a hand on the wheel. It needs to be reformed, it needs to do something useful on the world stage, and with the Eastern Europeans in, the UK can increasingly fashion it. Better than being on the outside exposed to the mercy of events on the continent on which we would have relinquished all power to influence for the better.
Michael Howard wants to renegotiate and get back the things from the EU that past Conservative governments gave up under the Single European Act (that Maggie Thatcher signed in 1986, a woman who appointed a succession of Euro-enthusiastic foreign secretaries, and who, in her last weeks in power, took sterling into the exchange-rate mechanism), and the Maastricht Treaty, signed by John Major and ratified by Parliament in July 1993.
As for the UK having to follow an EU "line" in foreign policy unless we get out is, er, b***ocks.
The Conservatives signed up to 'loyal cooperation' under Maastricht. It didn't mean much then, and it won't under the new EU Constitution -
Treaty of Maastricht (Article 11(2))
'The Member States shall support the Union's external and security policy actively and unreservedly in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity.'
New Treaty Article under EU Constitution (III-294.2)
'The Member States shall support the common foreign and security policy actively and unreservedly in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity.
No wonder Howard won't be Prime Minister on May 6. The man is an opportunist - over the EU and over Iraq - and so I wait for the Conservative party to use their time in opposition usefully, come up with what it is exactly they stand for, get a decent man, or woman, in charge, and kick the hell out of Gordon Brown and "Classic Labour" in 2009/10.
"The anti-war motion on March 19, 2003 was defeated in the Commons by 396 votes to 217, a majority of 179. There are currently 162 Conservative Members of Parliament in the House of Commons.
So, how did Blair have to rely on Conservative votes?"
139 Tories voted with the Government. If they'd voted the other way, the Government would have been defeated 356 - 257.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.