Little Englanders Get It Badly Wrong On Iraq (This time without a flame war, please)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | May 6, 2005 | William Shawcross

[quidnunc]

Politics is all local, especially at election time. But the "Little Britain" manner in which Tony Blair's enemies have exploited Iraq before today's election is a real disgrace.

In their extreme zeal to try and prove that "Blair lied," his critics amongst the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats — and all the left-of-center, fashionable bien-pensant writers, actors and intellectuals of London — resolutely turn their face against the realities of Iraq and of the Middle East itself. Listening to the tone of the debate, you would think that there were no Iraqis out there and that "Iraq" was merely a code word for some appalling new kind of politically incorrect abuse. You would think that George Bush and Mr. Blair invented the threat from Saddam.

-snip-

Anyone who pretends — as many of Mr. Blair's opponents do — that Saddam could have been controlled by the principled resilience of the Security Council in 2003, is deliberately ignoring history. Moreover, the sanctions which contained Saddam — and indeed, also profited him — had devastated Iraq's people. Opponents of Western policy toward Iraq used to emphasize that before March 2003. Now they never mention it.

-snip-

I can think of many, many reasons to vote against Mr. Blair's New Labour party today. But it is really depressing that his role in liberating Iraq (and previously Sierra Leone, Kosovo and Afghanistan) is just the subject of vulgar abuse by Little Englanders. To them anti-Americanism is far more important than solidarity with Iraqis trying to build a new society.

-snip-

[MadIvan]

Brian's post in denying that there is no anti-British bigotry going on, is, ironically, proof positive of his own bigotry.

Regards, Ivan

[David Hunter]

And, in fairness, of course there is a percentage -- although small and getting smaller by the minute -- of Brits who love Americans and everything American -- but the vast majority of them are at best condescending toward US and supercilliously sanctimonious in their imagined superiority which, to a girlyman, including here on FR, they demonstrate in the most inferior manner imaginable!

It sounds like insulting people is a talent of yours Brian Allen. Do you really think that a generalisation like this is acceptable? Could this be an example of the bigoted 'trash talk' which quidnunc complained about when it was directed against the US?

[David Hunter]

Brian's post in denying that there is no anti-British bigotry going on, is, ironically, proof positive of his own bigotry.

Yes, and I doubt that he sees his own hypocrisy.

Please could you or flitton advise UncleHambone (post 12 - above) about whether or not there are any areas - or specific places - in London which American tourists should avoid, because he is planning to visit as a personal thank you for British help in the WOT. (I haven't been down to London for many years so I can't help him). Thanks.

[MadIvan]

The reception should be fine...however there are some areas, just like in any major city, that one should avoid. Fortunately, these areas also contain very little in the way of tourism interest.

Do not go to:

Hackney
Tower Hamlets
Brixton

You may want to avoid:

Islington

I used to live there, it is a left wing hell hole. Not that left wingers randomly assault people, but the council is so left wing they allowed the beggars who had been kicked out of other parts of London to settle there.

Lambeth:

Some of it is dodgy, but the Imperial War Museum is there.

Mostly safe areas:

Westminster (which contains most of the tourist attractions anyway)
Kensington & Chelsea
Fulham
City of London

Please mail me privately if you'd like a list of my recommended places to visit.

Regards, Ivan

[Incorrigible]

I'm growing weary of this pettyness as well.

Let's get back to the subject at hand.

Ivan, more than a few talk radio hosts in the US have characterized the gain made by the Conservatives in the UK demonstrates that the population was actually in agreement with the War on Terror in Iraq given that the Conservatives were actually more pro-war than Blair himself.  Is this a valid assessment?

Also, I can't explain Howard's browbeating Blair about lying about the intelligence reports since he would have likely gone in anyway had he been PM.

I'm sad about the state of the Tories in the UK.  However, I have to admit I was sad about the state of Conservative Republicans in the US in 2000 as GW Bush seemed to be the designated nominee for the November election that year.  I didn't think he had it in him and I'm glad to say I was wrong.

With Howard gone, I hope that someone can take the mantle of the Conservatives and turn them into a party with a vision rather than letting Labour control the agenda and take the policies they would rightly champion away from them.

Got any political ambitions yourself there Ivan?  The UK needs you now more than ever!

[Incorrigible]

Sorry to bud in but can we just give it a rest for a few days?

[MadIvan]

It is definitely true that approximately 70% of the votes went to parties in favour of the Iraq War. More than that, if we take into account UKIP voters. Polls consistently showed that Iraq was low on the list of priorities for voters...reaction against Labour has to do with the government definitely being past its sell by date. For a similar situation in America, think about the Clinton Administration, circa 2000, and Dick Cheney saying, "The wheel has turned and it is time for them to go"...there is a similar whiff of rot from Labour.

Howard has already stated that he would have gone to war in Iraq, just the reasoning he would have used would have been different. His issue with Blair was one of presentation, not of action...I regarded it as rather trifling myself on Howard's part.

As for a career in politics...unfortunately I am not good enough at censoring myself to pursue that career. Besides, we have some good young MPs in the Conservative Party now...I cannot recommend strongly enough, Greg Hands, the new MP for Hammersmith & Fulham.

Regards, Ivan

[flitton]

You should be fine in London in terms of doing tourist type things during the day. I'd agree with Ivan about safe places to go. Take the precautions you'd take visiting any large city. I'd encourage you to come when there's a chance of good weather so you can take advantage of the river and the parks.

Do Freepmail me if you'd like recommendations of places to visit.

[Incorrigible]

Ivan,

I checked out this BBC article and got more info on the UKIP.  After the European elections, I thought they had a brighter future but it seems there's already fractures in the party.  I hope the Tories pick up on some of the sentiment that got the UKIP some recognition.

 

BBC: UKIP falls short of its targets

Roger Knapman was hopeful of winning at least one seat The UK Independence Party has failed to make an electoral breakthrough, despite its biggest Parliamentary campaign UKIP, shorn of its most high-profile campaigner Robert Kilroy-Silk, has lost its deposits in at least 451 seats - costing it about £225,500.

[David Hunter]

I was only trying to point out that quidnunc clearly stated that he was on a personal crusade against British posters here on FR, due entirely to his preconceived anti-British bias. I may have criticised Brian Allen for his own attack on UK freepers, but I hardly think that he was justified in calling me a 'serial sex abuser', 'pornographer' and 'dole lubber', and whatever the rest of the charming names he used in post #25 were. As far as I'm concerned I have made my point about quidnunc and this subject is now closed, if Brian Allen wants to continue flaming me then that is his prerogative, but I shall ignore him.

[MadIvan]

The whole Kilroy Silk fracas killed the UKIP. It was a good idea at the time, but I've returned to the Tories.

Regards, Ivan

[Brian Allen]

OK. I already quit. Best ones -- B A

[Incorrigible]

Likewise Brian,

Thanks!

[Brian Allen]

<< I may have criticised Brian Allen for his own attack on UK freepers, but I hardly think that he was justified in calling me a 'serial sex abuser', 'pornographer' and 'dole lubber', and whatever the rest of the charming names he used in post #25 .... >>

David -- I didn't call you any of those things. I created an apparenly fictional [?] character and offered the suggestion your attacks on quidnunc and apparently, given that you have also had a very good crack or two at me, upon any who talk of the actual Britain -- and not one from Biggles and/or Boys Own Paper -- might be seen to put you in that character's company. Sorry for your misunderstanding about that

My intention was to very seriously take the mickey -- not to personally attack, insult or malign you.

My aplologies if it seems to you that I did any of those.

Best ones -- B A

[David Hunter]

Well thank you for your apology. However, you must admit that if your post was deleted by the moderator then he or she must also have misunderstood it and taken it to be abusive.

As for your comment about the 'actual Britain', what constitutes any given individual's actuality is defined by the specific circumstances within their circumscribed geographical region. I have many American colleagues, (and some American relatives too), who can tell you that here in North Yorkshire there is not an atmosphere of anti-Americanism. Perhaps not all areas of Britain are like that - which would be very sad - but it is unfair to generalise about anti-Americanism among the British people.

[Brian Allen]

<< However, .... if your post was deleted by the moderator then he or she must also have misunderstood it ... >>

Correct.

If it was deleted -- and who's looking -- then indeed she most certainly must also have so misunderstood.

But then, present company excepted, who's perfect?

[Irish_Thatcherite]

You know something, Micheal Howard should not resign! He done better than Ian Duncan Smith and William Hague - and it's a pity the UKIP did badly - I was hoping against hope that there would be a Tory/UKIP coalition in power today - Britain would have then left the EU tyranny, and therefore Ireland would have to follow.

Blair in power, more appeasement of the IRA I take it!!!

God, help us!!!!!!!!!

[Incorrigible]

Should we take solace in the resignation of David Trimble?