"Try to read my posts in context. I was responding to someone's remarks about the UN. My #10 was in response to #5, where someone said the UN would be involved. I responded that in addition to harsh words, there'd be a time out. (What one would expect from the UN, yes?) I think all three of you owe man an apology."
My response wasn't to your post specifically as much as to a disparaging trend I was seeing. I was reading your post when it hit critical mass. I don't recall anything in what you said that didn't seem to be about Blair; if it was aimed at the UN, fire away as far as I'm concerned - although having a unanimous opposition if it is available CAN mean something, like showing the Iranian people that their regime has seriously overplayed its hand.
It might help to avoid confusion and misunderstandings if you include reference to what you're responding to. I find it awkward to try to constantly flip back and forth between posts to see what the writer's train of thought is. Just my lazy way, but it helps.
For now, no apologies. I think Blair's playing it just right, and have no doubts about his willingness and ability to use necessary force at a time and conditions of his choosing. If he is able to actually use the UN, he'd be making a silk purse out of a sow's bunghole, but God bless him.
I was responding to what someone said about the UN. No, I didn't quote it, and I should have. I was in a hurry, and either FR or my isp connection was exceedingly slow, so I just took the quickest route--my apologies for that.
Yet I have NO doubt that some folks are itchin' for a fight and will find offense whether any is offered or not. In at least one case I am sure that was what happened. I even re-quoted both messages, but sometimes you can't reach some people even with the facts, a problem we also see among 'Rats.
Let me assure everyone here--if I have a criticism of someone, I will come right out and say so. If I had a beef with Tony Blair, I would have said it and I wouldn't beat around the bush about it. I DO in fact have a beef with the UK for decimating their Royal Navy; I have said so often. Tony Blair had no hand in that--bashing him for what the rest of his foolish government did would be just a bit like bashing our President Bush for the idiotic things the 'Rat congress does.
I maintain that Tony Blair is one of the best friends this country has, and he has more courage in his little finger than all the of the 'Rat side of our own congress put together. He has risked everything in the war on terror, and just might have lost much of what he risked. Silly, foolish Brits to not appreciate what they have in Tony Blair.