This discussion is closed.
Airport Fairy
Badges:
#1
Report 16 years ago
#1
Is Tony Blair a liar?
0
Sam2k
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#2
Report 16 years ago
#2
What, in particular, do you believe he lied about?
0
LH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#3
Report 16 years ago
#3
(Original post by moncal)
What, in particular, do you believe he lied about?
Iraq's weaponry is the main thing he apparantly lied about.
0
BloodyValentine
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#4
Report 16 years ago
#4
i think he'd have to be a good liar to be a politician, cynical but true
0
Cool Lad
Badges: 0
#5
Report 16 years ago
#5
(Original post by BloodyValentine)
i think he'd have to be a good liar to be a politician, cynical but true
I think liars a bit strong.......he just selected the information which supported his case :cool:
0
an Siarach
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#6
Report 16 years ago
#6
(Original post by moncal)
What, in particular, do you believe he lied about?
If we were to get very pedantic over this we could say he didnt lie, he merely 'misled'. A better wording of the question would have been to ask if he was dishonest.
0
BloodyValentine
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report 16 years ago
#7
(Original post by Cool Lad)
I think liars a bit strong.......he just selected the information which supported his case :cool:
i wasn't talking about iraq i was being more general, maybe in the words of whatever that guy was called he is merely "economical with the truth"
0
LH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#8
Report 16 years ago
#8
(Original post by Cool Lad)
I think liars a bit strong.......he just selected the information which supported his case :cool:
Economical with the truth?
0
BloodyValentine
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report 16 years ago
#9
jonathan aitken that's the one
0
Cool Lad
Badges: 0
#10
Report 16 years ago
#10
If he did mislead the country over the WMD were we still right to go to war?
0
BloodyValentine
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report 16 years ago
#11
(Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
Economical with the truth?
great minds think alike
0
LH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#12
Report 16 years ago
#12
(Original post by Cool Lad)
If he did mislead the country over the WMD were we still right to go to war?
I think so, but it should have been presented as a war to remove Saddam Hussein rather than as a war to remove a threat to this country.
0
an Siarach
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 16 years ago
#13
(Original post by Cool Lad)
If he did mislead the country over the WMD were we still right to go to war?
The outcome of the war was just in ideal, though we have yet to see if it will be just in result - its just a shame they felt the need to create an unsupportable lie to 'validate' it.
0
Cool Lad
Badges: 0
#14
Report 16 years ago
#14
(Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
I think so, but it should have been presented as a war to remove Saddam Hussein rather than as a war to remove a threat to this country.
North Korea is more of a threat than Iraq ever was, with all the fuss some people have kicked up over Iraq there less likely to move against North Korea!
0
an Siarach
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#15
Report 16 years ago
#15
(Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
I think so, but it should have been presented as a war to remove Saddam Hussein rather than as a war to remove a threat to this country.
Exactly so, the only problem with this is international law and the fact that doing so would have resulted in cries of imperialism etc etc 'what right do we have to interfere in other countries' and the like, though considering that we went against popular local and international opinion anyway and have exactly the same accusations and questions facing us i dont see how much of a difference it would have made.
0
an Siarach
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#16
Report 16 years ago
#16
(Original post by Cool Lad)
North Korea is more of a threat than Iraq ever was, with all the fuss some people have kicked up over Iraq there less likely to move against North Korea!
Iraqs military was totally impotent after the first Gulf War, North Koreas is fully active and a war against it would have been lengthier and far costlier in terms of money and lives.
0
Cool Lad
Badges: 0
#17
Report 16 years ago
#17
(Original post by an Siarach)
Exactly so, the only problem with this is international law and the fact that doing so would have resulted in cries of imperialism etc etc 'what right do we have to interfere in other countries' and the like, though considering that we went against popular local and international opinion anyway and have exactly the same accusations and questions facing us i dont see how much of a difference it would have made.
so do u support the war?
0
LH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 16 years ago
#18
(Original post by Cool Lad)
North Korea is more of a threat than Iraq ever was, with all the fuss some people have kicked up over Iraq there less likely to move against North Korea!
Yeah but North Korea would have been a difficult war

You make a good point, though I supported the removal of Saddam Hussein the military resources used in Iraq could have been used better elsewhere such as North Korea.
0
Cool Lad
Badges: 0
#19
Report 16 years ago
#19
(Original post by an Siarach)
Iraqs military was totally impotent after the first Gulf War, North Koreas is fully active and a war against it would have been lengthier and far costlier in terms of money and lives.
But is a far greater threat!
0
BloodyValentine
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report 16 years ago
#20
(Original post by an Siarach)
Iraqs military was totally impotent after the first Gulf War, North Koreas is fully active and a war against it would have been lengthier and far costlier in terms of money and lives.

and they don't have any oil
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you confident you could find support for your mental health if you needed it in COVID-19?

Yes (50)
22.42%
No (173)
77.58%

Watched Threads

View All