Skip to content or view screen version

Don't support Hilary Clinton ... but hey noone going to listen!

Jo Bloggs | 28.04.2007 13:29

It wrong to support Clinton because... (I am alway slating somebody else's reports so here my thoughts.)

Hilary Clinton
Hilary Clinton

George Bush
George Bush


Hilary Clinton is nothing more than a populist like Tony Blair, whiles in my opinion the war in Iraq is wrong thanks to Tony Blair “dossier”. I like to add forced upon the U.K. intelligence community at a policy level rather than intelligence dictating policy, it had created more terrorist to deal with, Saddam was nothing more than a Middle Eastern Fidel Castro figurehead. It would appear with hindsight Saddam Hench men been doing a better job at dealing with dissent within Iraqi than we can ever do. We are just too liberal and too media aware to do anything effectively within Iraqi. We were in fact warned of this prior to the war and history would dictate during the British/French Empire in the Middle East. But hey let ignore the facts and go to war.

The biggest problem is that Tony Blair had self-inflated opinion of himself and trapped politically with the Yugoslavia war when we was force to beg for help from the U.S. (The old U.S.S.R. had only had to knock on the door of NATO and it would had collapse!) I believe Hilary Husband Bill Clinton had asked that Tony Blair would return a favour in return for supplying troops etc. Tony Blair was still in power so when the new U.S. President George W. Bush came to power, Tony Blair was reminded of this fact and with a strange sense of destiny and fulfilment he agreed with Bush. To Tony credit and (He gets little from me) he did listen to his civil servant for once and when the original plans were announced. As they say in Britain civil servants “drop their kittens” and vastly watered down the original Japanese style invasion plans to few selected places.

Whiles I can understand why the American is wishing for a withdrawal of their troops and I can’t blame them. It would create within Iraq a vacuum as many of the so called “Iraqi” troops are sided with either “Sunni or Shia” you can expect a civil war to break out pretty quickly in Iraq as the Sunni seek to take over as much of Iraq as they can and take on the “U.S. own” oil wells in the south. Which we will see the return of troops back into Iraq to sort this mess out.

Interestingly the Bush family made their money by selling oil during to Second World War to the U.S. government. So you could peculate was the war in the Middle East for oil or was it to stop terrorist using it as a breeding site? Or like wise in comparison was America intervention in the Second World War was to stop Japan and Nazis Imperialism or was it to destroy the British, French and Dutch Economic Empire? Nothing is what it seems.

And as for Tony Blair maybe it wouldn’t hurt if and when he reads intelligences reports in the future and that he bears in mind intelligence reports are base upon a degree of Probability and not on Certainty. Maybe next time he won’t be so trigger happily.

So no I don’t support Hilary Clinton, you are going to have to make the best of the mess that has been created if it means more British and American troops getting killed. The Iraqi government has not got the power or the support it needs to control the country.

Rant Over :)

Jo Bloggs

Comments

Hide the following 2 comments

Rather silly

28.04.2007 16:00

How can you expect anybody to take you seriously if you include posing the question .....

"Or like wise in comparison was America intervention in the Second World War was to stop Japan and Nazis Imperialism or was it to destroy the British, French and Dutch Economic Empire? Nothing is what it seems."

The silliness of the question is that no US intervention was required in the second case. By the time of the US intervention, both the Dutch and the French had been conquered and the British barely holding on by their toenails.

Mike Novack
mail e-mail: stepbystpefarm mtdata.com


:(

29.04.2007 09:36

I spent ages last night in writing a page reply. Sigh! It didn't appear, in short and I mean short! I was talking about the "Empire, Host and Dependant Nations” and how the dependant nation returned to the host nation after the WW2 and how the U.S. help the dependant nations to break away by bankrolling them. A good modern day example of this is, is Yugoslavia ousting Slobodan Milosevic from power. The gist was U.S. war aim was the break up of the Empire nations, Germany and Japanese imperialism in that order but Jo Public is ever going be told of points two and three.

I sorry this seems such a slash dash effort it formulating a reply but here is it the gist of it!

Jo Bloggs