What is he getting us and our children into? Maggie Thatcher went because she began to turn into a liability for the Conservatives. Why is the Blair government still there?
2006-09-01 08:01:28 · 17 answers · asked by stingmyflesh 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
its about time thay went and after reading the papers about giving asbos to unborn kids he and them have totally lost the plot
2006-09-01 09:06:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think Tony Blair should NOT continue be the leader of the Labour party, however I would definitely continue to support the party. Tony enjoys being George Bush's lapdog too much. Pant, pant! He's the worst excuse for a socialist leader Britain has ever had. In a way, he's like Margaret Thatcher with her hero-worship of Bad Ronnie.
2006-09-01 08:13:20 · answer #2 · answered by The Gadfly 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are a pair of similariies, they're the two male,the two married with infants, the two politicians and the two ultimate ministers - and that's the area it stops. For a initiate Winston Spencer Churchill grew to grow to be a baby-kisser of conviction, Blair is a occupation baby-kisser - he would not have a similar journey for a undertaking that Churchill had or the two confronted rat might never, ever have complete to this u . s . a . what he did with immigration! he's been an unmitigated disaster yet boy oh boy hasn't he lined his very own wallet ideal on the way on a similar time as some thing human beings taxpayers have long previous from undesirable to worse! he's complete extra effective valuable than the German protection tension might have complete if that they had have been given top right here - he's destroyed education, regulation and order, immigration, allowed Brown to fleece our pensions, allowed our utilities to be offered off to remote places agencies, allowed a proliferation of over a million jobs interior the civil provider - those are jobsworth jobs no longer genuine ones, you already understand the type, each and each physique has a secretary and he or she desires a p.a. and her p.a. desires a p.a. - and on we bypass spending OUR funds on ineffective, valueless jobs which upload no longer some thing to the country. purely approximately controlled to interrupt our farming industry, has overseen the closure of too many placed up places of artwork that are desperately needed interior the countryside. that's a ask your self Winston isn't increasing from his grave having this assessment made and by using whom? Oh confident, Cherie sales section severe high quality administration, aka Cherie Blair - daughter of a philandering drunk who might desire to no longer act his way out of a paper bag and better 0.5 Tony Blair who will bypass down in background by using actuality the main ineffective ultimate Minister ever - might you utilize her centers in retaining alongside along with her intelligence? i would not!
2016-11-06 05:49:25 · answer #3 · answered by sikorski 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the army top brass had any guts,they would have refused to go to Iraq,but to save their careers,they turned themselves & their men into war-criminals.They knew what they were doing was illegal under International law.They should have arrested Blair as a traitor for handing Britains' foreign policy over to Bush.So,yes,Blair & his gang should be removed from office.
2006-09-01 09:29:11 · answer #4 · answered by michael k 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think the Labour Party leaves a lot to be desired and I did not vote for them, but they should only go if it is done by the proper means and the British people vote them out.
We are a democracy, like it or lump it we face the consequences of the decisions of the majority, but I wouldn't have it any other way.
2006-09-01 09:49:00 · answer #5 · answered by Linda R 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am not a citizen on the UK but I do not see any reason to take radical actions to remove Mr. Blair's government. I do not see what he has done to the UK. As I see it, the perpetrators are the terrorists and they were around before Mr. Blair was even in politics.
2006-09-01 08:35:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because Labour traditionally aren't the rabid dogs that the Conservatives are, sharpening their knives and despatching leaders willy nilly. But I think the patience of the Labour rank and file is getting sorely tested, and it won't be long before we see a leadership challenge. Blair needs to wake up and smell the coffee - he is yesterday's man.
2006-09-01 09:46:15 · answer #7 · answered by Jude 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If it were up to me, he would be gone in a flash.
...but
I am quite glad it isn't up to me because then I would be a power-crazed despot with a huge palace and a harem and if you wrote anything bad about me on here I would have you shot.
mmm - current system isn't great and could do with some improvement, but I don't think a revolution is the right answer.
Hopefully, the system will get rid of him soon.
2006-09-01 08:12:08 · answer #8 · answered by Robin 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am aware that the most popular thing to do would be to say the government should be removed, however they were voted in by us and we have to entrust in them this may mean as human beings they get it wrong from time to time but dont we all???? i think if we removed every member of government that got it wrong would we have any left??????
2006-09-01 08:53:06 · answer #9 · answered by mumof2 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because sufficient members of the Labour Party will not turn on him.....yet! Other than that we have to wait for the next election.
2006-09-01 08:09:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋