Honours?

[Good old]

Moving the goalposts now ,you gave an opinion on the numbers saddam had actually been responsible for up to gulf war 2 I gave the figures widely available online  for that and for those killed in Iraq as a result of that war.

You then counter with other wars or how many might he have killed if not stopped,that's a spurious argument.

Whatever a bastard Saddam was if we're talking numbers and damage done Bush and Bliar are streets ahead.

No I haven't moved anything, I gave no actual number just a broad assessment in hundreds of thousands.
You gave assessments for what you claim, And if you want to make your argument on casualties as a result of the war ,then you need to recognise Saddams, killing would not have stopped . A good deal of the killing directly after the war and to this day was militia, fights that could well have happened sooner or later anyway. Other wars ,that was only making the point that others have created other wars and not got this criticism.
I simply disagree , the thousands fighting Iran, Kuwait , the many thousands we know of in his own  country.and he was no friend, and given the chance a threat.
The allies created the most death and damage, 1939-1946 it doesn't mean it was wrong to be in the fight.

[srb7677]

A new poll finds that the public overwhelmingly reject the new Blair nighthood with only 14% approving and 63% disapproving, 41% strongly disapproving. Clearly those issueing these titles do not give a flying one for what we the mere public think. 

Public overwhelmingly against Tony Blair knighthood, poll finds | The Independent

[cromwell]

Yes but you introduced the estimate for what may be attributed to the coalition since. I only say if you do that then estimate what Saddams record would be by now if not stopped in his tracks.
Yes so many noughts to add, but not down to Blair bye and large . Streetwalker, says what people think of Blair is set, I think he is right, certainly in your case. What I say to you makes no difference , rightfully. But 6/7 hundred thousand signatures , is not public opinion, anymore than 470,000 Labour membership is, even double or treble is it public opinion in either case. And I only make some argument in support of all those that will not be signing this petition, not with the idea I could change your mind or it seems the majority of the small number of contributors on here.

Moving the goalposts now ,you gave an opinion on the numbers saddam had actually been responsible for up to gulf war 2 I gave the figures widely available online  for that and for those killed in Iraq as a result of that war.

You then counter with other wars or how many might he have killed if not stopped,that's a spurious argument.

Whatever a bastard Saddam was if we're talking numbers and damage done Bush and Bliar are streets ahead.

[Good old]

Yes I certainly did because I was answering thisWhere you make the point regarding his own people,if you wish to add the numbers killed by the yanks and the uk in other wars how many noughts should we add to that figure?

Yes but you introduced the estimate for what may be attributed to the coalition since. I only say if you do that then estimate what Saddams record would be by now if not stopped in his tracks.
Yes so many noughts to add, but not down to Blair bye and large . Streetwalker, says what people think of Blair is set, I think he is right, certainly in your case. What I say to you makes no difference , rightfully. But 6/7 hundred thousand signatures , is not public opinion, anymore than 470,000 Labour membership is, even double or treble is it public opinion in either case. And I only make some argument in support of all those that will not be signing this petition, not with the idea I could change your mind or it seems the majority of the small number of contributors on here.

[cromwell]

You omit the estimates for blood he shed fighting his neighbours . And how about trying to estimate how much more blood would ever have been on his hands if left to get on with it. Or the disruption he would have created in the area regardless.
Blair deserves his award as much as a good many of those that have had  that sort of award in the past Condemn him if you wish , I,ll condemn who I wish, the list goes well beyond him. But only he gets to be the subject of a petition.

Yes I certainly did because I was answering this

I'm making the point that Blair shouldn't need excuses  any more more than Cameron, needed the excuse of defending the people of Libya, against their leader by bombing the place. Helping the disruption of all of N Africa, to the detriment of Europe it did not need weapons of mass destruction then. Yet the removal of  Saddam, who had murdered thousands of his subjects for years past and on going , by Blair, and 67 other national leaders is considered immoral.

Where you make the point regarding his own people,if you wish to add the numbers killed by the yanks and the uk in other wars how many noughts should we add to that figure?

[Good old]

Well if you want to forget the morals it's estimated saddam killed between 50 to 100000 of his people the estimate as a direct result of the bush Bliar war is half a million Iraqis.

Now tell me he deserves an award or complain that people condemn him whilst you think it fine to condemn saddam.

You omit the estimates for blood he shed fighting his neighbours . And how about trying to estimate how much more blood would ever have been on his hands if left to get on with it. Or the disruption he would have created in the area regardless.
Blair deserves his award as much as a good many of those that have had  that sort of award in the past Condemn him if you wish , I,ll condemn who I wish, the list goes well beyond him. But only he gets to be the subject of a petition.

[Sampanviking]

Well if you want to forget the morals it's estimated saddam killed between 50 to 100000 of his people the estimate as a direct result of the bush Bliar war is half a million Iraqis.

Now tell me he deserves an award or complain that people condemn him whilst you think it fine to condemn saddam.

Blair is a serial liar and war criminal, implicit in very real crimes against humanity, all of which was dressed up and presented under the guise of so called Human Rights. That a creature such as this is considered worthy of an honour is nothing less than a two fingered salute from the Oligarchs to the populace.

So why did he have to awarded membership of one of the highest orders of the land? so that other former Prime Ministers can also be offered honours at the next opportunity.
Praise indeed! (and utter bulwarks at that).

[cromwell]

I'm making the point that Blair shouldn't need excuses  any more more than Cameron, needed the excuse of defending the people of Libya, against their leader by bombing the place. Helping the disruption of all of N Africa, to the detriment of Europe it did not need weapons of mass destruction then. Yet the removal of  Saddam, who had murdered thousands of his subjects for years past and on going , by Blair, and 67 other national leaders is considered immoral.

Well if you want to forget the morals it's estimated saddam killed between 50 to 100000 of his people the estimate as a direct result of the bush Bliar war is half a million Iraqis.

Now tell me he deserves an award or complain that people condemn him whilst you think it fine to condemn saddam.

[Sheepy]

I'm making the point that Blair shouldn't need excuses  any more more than Cameron, needed the excuse of defending the people of Libya, against their leader by bombing the place. Helping the disruption of all of N Africa, to the detriment of Europe it did not need weapons of mass destruction then. Yet the removal of  Saddam, who had murdered thousands of his subjects for years past and on going , by Blair, and 67 other national leaders is considered immoral.

Well, he obviously does because I have listened to his minions threatening everyone and his dog if he doesn't get his way, which a bit like what happened in the rest of the middle east. 

[Good old]

And are you busy condemning all the dictators and murderous regimes that exist now and urging us to wage war on them or are you just making excuses for Bliar? 

I'm making the point that Blair shouldn't need excuses  any more more than Cameron, needed the excuse of defending the people of Libya, against their leader by bombing the place. Helping the disruption of all of N Africa, to the detriment of Europe it did not need weapons of mass destruction then. Yet the removal of  Saddam, who had murdered thousands of his subjects for years past and on going , by Blair, and 67 other national leaders is considered immoral. 

[Streetwalker]

The award system is basically institutions forcing those they think have done a good job within that institution  on the rest of us .  I dont think they even mean anything , its not that they give the recipients any special powers or anything just an acknowledgment that they have climbed the greasy pole in their chosen field .

The award tells us plebs that the person is deserving of respect and we should act accordingly in their presence .

The whole awards thing was losing its appeal anyway ,mostly people just doing the job they are often paid handsomely for doing with a sprinkling of well deserved recognition as cover to  the majority of frauds  

Blair ?   I guess people had already made their minds up about him  ,giving him a gong isn't  going to change that .  

 

[Sheepy]

No sheep I said most people couldn't give a toss, that wasn't about all war  in general, it was about Blair's knighthood.And at the  moment it would take something beyond 30,mill more people signing that petition to make me think most people might give a toss.
As far as I'm concerned , if you tarnish Blair, in such a public manner . Then going back to an old subject I know, but  there are any number of statues that could be pulled from their pedestals , and not that far removed from the present. If this is a question of morality, or anti war. Then Blair didn't invent war, or suddenly become the first British war leader without 100% morality guiding his every move.

Is it? I haven't used any sway which we all know I have in powerful places I have said all along we will see. As for what it is about, I will let people make up their own minds, after all freedom of choice is a big thing in a democracy.

[Barry]

I think the response is about morality, not anti-war. Blair and his sidekick Alistair Campbell worked on a plot to falsify a pretext for war.
That war cost countless lives and also cost the stability of the whole region, which is still difficult as Iran have seen it as an opportunity to interfere.
So, morality, yes, Blair lied and many of our young troops died as a result.
I would support the families of all those who died in a false war, based on a sexed up document, in ensuring Blair does not get awarded for his warmongering. In fact I'm off to add to the petition, now.

[Good old]

I thought you said nobody cared about any of this, just saying.

No sheep I said most people couldn't give a toss, that wasn't about all war  in general, it was about Blair's knighthood.And at the  moment it would take something beyond 30,mill more people signing that petition to make me think most people might give a toss.
As far as I'm concerned , if you tarnish Blair, in such a public manner . Then going back to an old subject I know, but  there are any number of statues that could be pulled from their pedestals , and not that far removed from the present. If this is a question of morality, or anti war. Then Blair didn't invent war, or suddenly become the first British war leader without 100% morality guiding his every move.

[cromwell]

I would personally condemn , the acts you mention. But I wouldn't go after the people or persons that did something about those acts. Even if it involved violence. It's easy to condemn , I would condemn doing f—k all with someone like Sadam.

And are you busy condemning all the dictators and murderous regimes that exist now and urging us to wage war on them or are you just making excuses for Bliar?