Uk Intelligence.

[J'Pol]

What sort of leader when under pressure says that,

Actually one of the reasons we had for going to war, was based on intelligence supplied to me by the UK, and we believed it. If we were wrong going to war then it was the UK´s fault all the time.

If this is the way to treat your staunchest Ally, then I am confused on what the word loyalty means.

I'm sorry to have to say this but your president is anything but a Statesman. Frankly he has no class.

[hobbes]

In my field of work, I am responsible for many different people, each of whom I am counting on, to perform their duties properly.

If someone screws up, it is MY fault or at least I am held accountable. I may recognize internally that a team individual messed up or mislead me, and I replace that person, but in the end, I, alone, must step forward and assume the failure.

This is the essence of leadership, ultimate responsibilty. Finger pointing is an internal process, not a public one. If Blair and Britain gave bad intelligence, Bush and Blair need to settle this amongst themselves. Bush must tell the American people that whatever comes from his mouth is his responsibilty.

[billyfridge]

The buck passing hasn.t even started yet, and the poor british weapons expert,
won't be the first casualty either. You can bet the top dogs will come out of it squeaky clean and still attatched to their jobs, whilst lesser individuals will get the blame and lose theirs. so much for the old boys network. Still a loyal Brit billyfridge.

[chalkmongoose]

Wait... Why is America even THINKING of trusting the Brits? I mean, not to cause a fight, but didn't we kick their asses with a few muskets and a guy in a coonskin cap a couple of hundred years back? I mean, we pretty much embarrased them in front of the whole world, and all they got to do as punishment was burn our white house down in 1812.

[MagicNakor]

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by chalkmongoose@21 July 2003 - 04:17
Wait... Why is America even THINKING of trusting the Brits? I mean, not to cause a fight, but didn't we kick their asses with a few muskets and a guy in a coonskin cap a couple of hundred years back? I mean, we pretty much embarrased them in front of the whole world, and all they got to do as punishment was burn our white house down in 1812.

ffs

look, go and sit in the corner

stfu when you're trolling for an argument

a better question than yours would be why was is that british special forces were used in the gulf war to take out american fibre optic communication cables?
shouldn't the "superior" american seals have done the job?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by billyfridge@20 July 2003 - 22:12
The buck passing hasn.t even started yet, and the poor british weapons expert,
won't be the first casualty either. You can bet the top dogs will come out of it squeaky clean and still attatched to their jobs, whilst lesser individuals will get the blame and lose theirs. so much for the old boys network.  Still a loyal Brit  billyfridge.

I cannot agree that they will come out squeaky clean.

In all likelihood Hoon and Campbell will lose their jobs, perhaps not immediately, but in the fullness of time.

Blair's reputation is severely tarnished, probably beyond repair. It is increasingly unlikely that he will serve another term as PM.

I only watched very little of the parliamentary inquisition of that man. The way he was treated was shameful. Having seen how the same MPs treated The PM and Campbell, it was obvious that were not going to upset anyone who could hurt them back. However they were quite willing to savage someone out of his depth.

To say to this man who was totally ill equipped to deal with the situation is an understatement. For them to make it clear that they believed him to be a scapegoat and still badger him the way they did was totally disgraceful. It really was the 15 minutes of fame scenario for failed politicians. They will have to live with their consciences.

However my original point remains that the way Bush has treated Blair and the British people in public is also shameful. After the support he was given, both physical and moral, one could have expected better from him. To see his staunchest Allies as a way out of a difficult situation is frankly despicable.

[thewizeard]

If you ask me the scenario is set for "finding"some WMD in Iraq.

[myfiles3000]

Originally posted by nigel123@21 July 2003 - 12:53
If you ask me the scenario is set for "finding"some WMD in Iraq.

jpaul's point about some bigwigs likely going down is right -- there wouldn't be so much publicity otherwise. I can't help but respect nigel's cynical speculation about "finding" WMD, but I think that plan is way too risky for them to try to pull off now -- the world is watching every move. the level of scrutiny just keeps getting higher.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by myfiles3000+21 July 2003 - 14:13--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (myfiles3000 @ 21 July 2003 - 14:13)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-nigel123@21 July 2003 - 12:53
If you ask me the scenario is set for "finding"some WMD in Iraq.

jpaul&#39;s point about some bigwigs likely going down is right -- there wouldn&#39;t be so much publicity otherwise. I can&#39;t help but respect nigel&#39;s cynical speculation about "finding" WMD, but I think that plan is way too risky for them to try to pull off now -- the world is watching every move. the level of scrutiny just keeps getting higher. [/b][/quote]
What do you think of the Bush / UK Intelligence situation.