English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article1220089.ece

Is Labour government in UK not a Bush ally any more? Or is it just Tony who is still under "wag the dog syndrome"?

2006-08-18 04:26:46 · 15 answers · asked by salma 1 in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

To undestand this we need seee Britain’s future foreign policy as there was a contradiction in the answers given. Asked if, in response to the threat from terrorism, Britain should change her foreign policy, 53% said yes - it should be more aggressive (12% said we should be more concillatory and 24% said no). However, asked in general whether Britain should continue to align herself with the USA on foreign policy, or move closer to Europe, 14% said the USA with 45% saying Europe. If one - reasonably enough - characterises US foreign policy as far more aggressive and “gung-ho” than that of most of the countries of the EU, these two answers seem contradictory. I think what is happening is that the answers are the result of two different emotional responses - on the first hand, peoples’ natural response to terrorism is to fight back and not give in to the terrorists. On the other hand, previous surveys have shown that President Bush and current American foreign policy are deeply unpopular in the this country. People want an agressive response to the terrorist threat…but clearly not the particular brand that President Bush is offering.

2006-08-18 22:52:12 · answer #1 · answered by decentguy10400 1 · 0 0

Why not ask John Prescott himself. He issued a statement in which he said: "This is an inaccurate report of a private conversation and it is not my view."

My view is simply that Prescott is frustrated that Bush had disengaged from the Arab-Israeli peace talks and stirred up a lot of animus in the Arab world with his emphasis on the greater mid-east peace initiatives.

Prescott is probably trying to achieve a solution to these problems, encountering difficulties and at the same time is a gentlemen. I think I would have used stronger words.

2006-08-18 08:02:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

John Prescott says the truth.

Blair is acting like Bush's lapdog. The lefist Labor party was never an ally of the right wing GOP.

2006-08-18 05:04:58 · answer #3 · answered by P P 5 · 0 0

I get the impression that the Labour Party or some of its elements are anti-Bush pierod. All becouse Iraq which some liberals can't get past. John Prescott doesn't understand there is a much bigger war on terrorism in my opioin.

2006-08-18 04:32:46 · answer #4 · answered by chuck h 5 · 0 0

Labour has never been a Bush ally. That's the problem. So many in the labour party oppose Bush and thus don't like Blair.

2006-08-18 04:31:45 · answer #5 · answered by ThePrez98 2 · 0 0

It's lucky Salma lives in a democratic country where you can offer an opinion,if you lived in a backward muslim country you can't criticize anything on pain of death.
God bless the Imperialist countries
AMEN.

2006-08-18 04:42:17 · answer #6 · answered by battersplat 2 · 0 0

We did no longer lose in Vietnam as a results of fact of our protection rigidity, We pulled out as a results of fact of Politcians in Washington and Drugged up Hippies/protesters like Jane Fonda and John Kerry who at best are traitors! specific I comprise Kerry in that assertion! The Vietnam conflict became into no longer lost till 2 years after the U. S. pulled out. For those to youthful to keep in mind, those photographs of Helicopters taking from the Roof of the U. S. embassy dubbed with the aid of on the instant's Liberals as our retreat and defeat, have been in certainty the U. S. Evacuating our Embassy and lifting out as many Vietnamese who supported us and worked for us as shall we. purely a small handfull persons advisors and Embassy artwork rigidity have been even in the 'NAM" at that component. We weren't defeated, South Vietnam became into yet no longer the u . s .! Had we stayed and Washington had the Intestinal Fortitude to do the spectacular subject we would have gained massive time! Nixon accomplished all he ought to to get us out of the conflict that JFK and Lyndon Johnson have been given us into yet our Liberal proffesors nevertheless attempt to pin the blame on Nixon. McCain became into there for some years as a results of fact of JFK and Johnson, the two Democrats. i'd additionally upload here that Nixon had a peace treaty with North Vietnam that coated that the u . s . would return would desire to the North wreck the treaty. Then our lovable Congress handed a regulation forbidding the u . s . from re getting into the conflict. whilst the North broke the words, then President Ford ought to do no longer something as a results of fact of Congress. i assume you may say that Congress became into the super loser!

2016-10-02 06:06:58 · answer #7 · answered by covarrubia 3 · 0 0

bush is crap i think prescott just said that to take the heat of blair for being on holidays during terrorist threats and lebanon...

2006-08-18 04:33:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

To show all us ignorant cowboy Americans what how real international intellectuals talk and think. And to reinforce our beliefs that most of the rest of the world is full of sanctimonious idiots.

Bwahahahaha!

2006-08-18 04:50:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

hard to say.really,.prezza is simply a disloyal dishevelled grumpy old man in need of a makeover

2006-08-18 04:35:30 · answer #10 · answered by Covenant Family Network Intl 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers