tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post4835312659380400833..comments2024-01-12T18:59:05.080+00:00Comments on Defence With A "C": Reaction to the "No" vote on SyriaUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-70322109666479789362013-09-01T20:12:23.282+01:002013-09-01T20:12:23.282+01:00I agree that DC could have waited a little longer....I agree that DC could have waited a little longer. How long is the question? Would Miliband et al have been swayed by Kerrys' statement of evidence the next day? I'm not entirely certain if the haste was so much as what did him, as the failure to adequately explain what the action was that was intended. Even now, you see people over at Think Defence who should know better talking about invasions and boots on the ground. Perhaps if DC had made the limited scope more apparent then that might have tipped things in his favour?<br /><br />As for Parliament, I think as long as you're not declaring world war three and you're certain that time will prove you right, there is a case for bypassing parliament and just getting on with the business. DC could have avoided a lot of shit by not recalling parliament from its holiday and just going with the "the cabinet agreed, based on the evidence given line". By Monday the strikes would have happened, it would have become apparent this wasn't another Iraq, and Cameron would have come out looking decisive.<br /><br />My concern now is that in future other leaders with slim majorities will simply not ask when they really should (for something more serious than this) and the blame for that will fall squarely at Milibands feet. His callous game playing could come back to haunt the country. The git has made a mockery of the democratic process, using an open vote to win points. <br /><br />God I want to punch him so hard in the gob right now.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-55477718321539387252013-09-01T18:12:18.879+01:002013-09-01T18:12:18.879+01:00In theory they are, but in reality as I say, you c...In theory they are, but in reality as I say, you cannot call a plebiscite and then ignore it. Trying to plough ahead without the plebiscite in the first place would have been mildly more acceptable than asking for an opinion and then simply ignoring it. Prime Ministers have called General Elections and resigned for less than this. <br /><br />The trouble DC had was not everyone was convinced the national interest was at stake. His opinion it was was under pressure from some very influential opinion makers such as ex military figures. <br /><br />Milliband deserves everything he gets if you ask me. He used this for personal gain and I'd see him put on trial for treason if I could get away with it. But DC shouldn't have got himself into the position where he could be so double crossed and if he had had control over his backbenchers and control of the debate he would have won even with Millibands grandstanding. DC obligingly sprinted full pelt right off a cliff. That Milliband couldn't resist a short term domestic political attack shows me everything I need to know about the moral fibre of the man. He can go fuck himself. But that doesn't absolve DC from being a retard over the matter and it doesn't justify getting yourself in the shit and then ignoring the plebiscite you rushed into. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-81169078850065084432013-09-01T17:51:50.733+01:002013-09-01T17:51:50.733+01:00I can't see it myself Phil,
Cameron did handl...I can't see it myself Phil,<br /><br />Cameron did handle this badly, but Milibands motion was very similar, just with slightly different conditions. He should have swallowed the fact that his little amendments weren't going to pass and gone with the vote. Instead he's using the whole thing as a game to trumpet himself.<br /><br />The US and the French will do the deed now. I just don't think it's politically viable to go back on it now. <br /><br />Personally I think we've seen before that Prime Ministers are more than entitled to act without consulting Parliament when the national interest is in play. And future Prime Ministers, especially those with slim majorities, are likely to do so from now on. Milband has set the tone; matters of this importance are too important to leave to the whims of party politics. Like Blair before him, he's just fucked a generation of parliament.<br /><br />As for Syria itself, I can't imagine anyone in their right mind putting boots on the ground. It would be suicidal politically. I imagine if the US was to propose it, France would shy away from it. <br /><br />Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-62640164749875485892013-09-01T12:32:59.253+01:002013-09-01T12:32:59.253+01:00I think as you know, DC screwed this right up and ...I think as you know, DC screwed this right up and I imagine he is going out of his mind at his amateur handling of this situation. He knew he needed a wider mandate, he was right to seek it. He was totally wrong to rush it like a fool and not give himself time to show some deeper leadership and drive and persuade on his agenda. <br /><br />He was right to accept the outcome - there is no doubt in my mind that this would have escalated to a constitutional crisis resulting in the fall of the Government. In reality one cannot hold a plebiscite and then ignore that plebiscite. The opposition will align on you as a matter of course and your own backbenchers are going to see a man who no longer listens to anyone but his inner circle. You can't run a country without the confidence of Parliament or even your own party. You just can't. In theory he could have tried but by instinctively knowing he couldn't really then I see this as a triumph of our institutions.<br /><br />BUT! I don't see the result as being set in stone. There is nothing wrong with going back to Parliament and here DC is being a coward. He has completely ruled it out. He won't put his neck on the line again and that is cowardly, I expect my statesmen to put their neck on the line and to keep putting their neck on the line. If he was so sure it is in our interest he should not fear putting himself against the wall again as long as he listens to the result. Sure it could embarrass him and frankly he'd have to resign, but again if this is so fundamental to our interests then he should be more than willing to fall on his sword over it. <br /><br />He really doesn't come out of this well. Other than knowing it had to go to Parliament and seeing the writing on the wall he looks like a bull in a china shop and now a political coward.<br /><br />I am ashamed he won't be taking part in an action but comforted somewhat that the US will probably go ahead anyway. Who knows maybe they'll get sucked into another Iraq and we'll be gloating on the sidelines like the French over Iraq and Labour and others will be vindicated. <br /><br />Phil from TDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-18593536714539428282013-09-01T00:14:22.219+01:002013-09-01T00:14:22.219+01:00Maurice,
I understand perfectly well how parliame...Maurice,<br /><br />I understand perfectly well how parliament works. <br /><br />And Cameron has already thrown his hands up and said that's the end of it. They could throw up another motion later, but that a) could be too late and b) is reliant on i) Cameron not "one upping" Miliband by refusing a second vote on the principle that Labour has already made up its mind and ii) Miliband back tracking on his "victory" by calling for or supporting a vote on military action.<br /><br />The situation is not lost completely, but someone would have to lose face and take a polticial blow for it to happen, which means that neither side is likely to agree to it. The papers today have been full of gloating about how Britain is no longer the US lap dog. It would be very damaging for a political party to now go against that.Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-85541867592786683952013-08-31T23:43:13.950+01:002013-08-31T23:43:13.950+01:00I think your falling for the executives spin on th...I think your falling for the executives spin on this and maybe dont understand how parliamentary decisions work. (executives always say the sky is falling to try and get their motions through) <br /><br />Read the words on the Order paper - Neither motion passed so there is no actual change in the UK's policy - from what was said in the debate on both motions if next week more information comes to light that covers the reassurances that people wanted they can put another motion up in about 30 mins.Mauricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16127354550160207353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-56072028200087421602013-08-31T17:16:35.787+01:002013-08-31T17:16:35.787+01:00Perhaps a little less gloomy today then?Perhaps a little less gloomy today then?Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18182426936194426623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-67569519033076607212013-08-31T09:35:21.353+01:002013-08-31T09:35:21.353+01:00I find it impossible to disagree with any of that;...I find it impossible to disagree with any of that; well said Chris C.<br /><br />A suitably impressed Gloomy.Gloomy Northern Boyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12232768532707968591noreply@blogger.com