CurryAngel Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I don't take much interest in politics, although I really should, but I have a question. Why is it that Gordon Brown seems to be getting assassinated by most of the media while Tony Blair got off scot-free? It seems to me that Brown inherited a mess rather than caused it. Â Maybe my question is an overly simplistic way of looking at things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freaky Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I don't take much interest in politics, although I really should, but I have a question. Why is it that Gordon Brown seems to be getting assassinated by most of the media while Tony Blair got off scot-free? It seems to me that Brown inherited a mess rather than caused it. Maybe my question is an overly simplistic way of looking at things. You might have a point, but Brown was Chancellor during that whole time, so he also helped to contribute to the mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurryAngel Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I don't take much interest in politics, although I really should, but I have a question. Why is it that Gordon Brown seems to be getting assassinated by most of the media while Tony Blair got off scot-free? It seems to me that Brown inherited a mess rather than caused it. Maybe my question is an overly simplistic way of looking at things. You might have a point, but Brown was Chancellor during that whole time, so he also helped to contribute to the mess.  Very true but it seems Blair has come out of it smelling of roses while Brown has been buried with this shit. I mean isn't Blair in line for a high ranking role in the EU in the near future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe_the_Lion Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 I don't take much interest in politics, although I really should, but I have a question. Why is it that Gordon Brown seems to be getting assassinated by most of the media while Tony Blair got off scot-free? It seems to me that Brown inherited a mess rather than caused it. Maybe my question is an overly simplistic way of looking at things. You might have a point, but Brown was Chancellor during that whole time, so he also helped to contribute to the mess.  Very true but it seems Blair has come out of it smelling of roses while Brown has been buried with this shit. I mean isn't Blair in line for a high ranking role in the EU in the near future?  Brown sort of made his own bed. One of the conditions on him being on staying chancellor was that he was given virtual autonomy, as a result he can be held far more accountable for his actions as chancellor than anyone else who has held that office in living memory. In fact Brown is still chancellor today, Darling is just a number monkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WU LYF 4 LYF Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 (edited) Thing is, the economy was going really well, especially pre-Iraq. When it came crashing down, it was with the entire world, so it's hard to say whose fault it actually was. Brown is just a poor front man, with Blair as the charismatic spokesman they looked a much more formidable force. Blair has much more respect worldwide, which helped his cause. Â Cameron is worse than them both. Edited October 1, 2009 by Flaming_June Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe_the_Lion Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Our economy wasn't doing well either pre-Iraq or pre-global crisis hit. Brown, quite literally, spent the family silver, or in this case gold, and when the crisis hit we were utterly fucked because the concept of putting something aside for a rainy day is utterly alien to him. The trouble with a house of cards is eventually even the gentlest of breezes can make it come tumbling down. Â If someones rent went up by 30% and they were evicted you mght have some sympathy for them. If you found out they'd spent the past few years maxing out credit cards on expensive shit they didn't need you're sympathy might be less forthcoming. Â Even now he still hasn't got the common decency to tell us how far in the hole we are by adding the PFI numbers onto the national debt figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WU LYF 4 LYF Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Our economy wasn't doing well either pre-Iraq or pre-global crisis hit. Brown, quite literally, spent the family silver, or in this case gold, and when the crisis hit we were utterly fucked because the concept of putting something aside for a rainy day is utterly alien to him. The trouble with a house of cards is eventually even the gentlest of breezes can make it come tumbling down. Â Well, possibly, I don't know enough about it. What I do know is that almost everyone I know had a better quality of life, at least materialistically, in 2006 than in 1996. And that quality of life has not diminished; indeed, for almost everyone I speak to including family, friends, workmates, etc there is only a recession on if you watch the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 Does anyone here know what the problem is with Iran and nuclear weapons? Â I know it may be a simplified way of looking at things, but why are we hassling the Iranians about the production of nuclear weapons, when both the UK & the US have weapons of mass destruction? Â We can have them, but other countries cannot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted October 1, 2009 Paid Members Share Posted October 1, 2009 Pretty much yeah. The more countries that have them the more likely that someone will use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 1, 2009 Author Share Posted October 1, 2009 Pretty much yeah. The more countries that have them the more likely that someone will use them. Â Despite the fact that the only country to use anything resembling a modern military weapons attack would be the US? Â Something smells of double standards I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted October 1, 2009 Paid Members Share Posted October 1, 2009 The US... thats very wrong mate. For example Israel and Lebanon a couple of years ago.  Wiki have a list up of wars from 2003 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_...E2%80%93current  I had to check to make sure I spelt Lebanon right.  So yeah, lots of wars. Could you imagin if just 1 of those countries used a nuke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WU LYF 4 LYF Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Love him or hate him, and I fall into the category of the former, Peter Mandelson delivered a killer speech to the Labour Conference this weekend. Watch it... Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 The US... thats very wrong mate. For example Israel and Lebanon a couple of years ago. Wiki have a list up of wars from 2003 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_...E2%80%93current  I had to check to make sure I spelt Lebanon right.  So yeah, lots of wars. Could you imagin if just 1 of those countries used a nuke?  Good point, the Iraq conflict was the only one that sprung to mind.  The point i'm making though is that if it's good enough for ourselves, the US and Israel etc to have them, then why not Iran?  Is it only countries that we deem suitable to have such weapons that are allowed to have them? Will we be slapping sanctions on anyone who decides to arm themselves in exactly the same way we have?  I'm fairly certain that it's not quite that simple, so i'm hoping someone with more knowledge on the matter can enlighten me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members MoChatra Posted October 2, 2009 Paid Members Share Posted October 2, 2009 Our economy wasn't doing well either pre-Iraq or pre-global crisis hit. Brown, quite literally, spent the family silver, or in this case gold, Even now he still hasn't got the common decency to tell us how far in the hole we are by adding the PFI numbers onto the national debt figures. Â Well, they're going to come on balance sheet once International Financial Reporting Standards are implemented across the public sector over the next couple of years. Â By then, of course, it will be a Conservative problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted October 5, 2009 Author Share Posted October 5, 2009 The Conservatives have announced their plans on how to "get Britain working"; Â The Conservatives say they would pay for their Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts