How the hell did a pro-war Prime Minister get elected in Britain?

Question

Who the f**k put Gordon Brown in office and more importantly how did he get there while supporting the War in Iraq? I'm gonna go puke.

David l: This is not my electoral system. I am a U.S. citizen so therefore I didn't know that the party elects the Prime Minister in Britain.

Answer 1

Gordon Brown was chosen because he realizes that the fight against Islama-fascism must be fought in the Middle East, not on European soil.

Instead of saying he is "pro war", how about realizing that he wants to give the Iraqis a chance to stabilize their government so it can defeat the insurgents? You wanna see war? Imagine the huge civil war that will break out if America and the English leave.

The party chose Gordon Brown because they still remember Neville Chamberlain telling the country on a radio address about the wonderful deal he made with Hitler. He told them to all go to bed and sleep peacefully. That was shortly before the Luftwaffe bombs started devastating London.

When you talk about the "war", in Iraq, why don't you try changing your terminology? It's more accurate to say we LIBERATED Iraq. To invade a country means you want to annex it for yourself. We certainly have not done that. The Iraqis drafted their own constitution, and elected their own leaders. We don't like some provisions, such as their acknowledgment of some parts of Sharia law, but we did not interfere with their Consitution.

Instead of calling him "Pro war", why not recognize that he is for a lasting peace? We didn't finish the job in Korea. Now there are two Koreas, and we've had to stay there for fifty years to protect the south! Is that what you want in the Middle East?

Remember one thing: the insurgents are fighting the democractically elected government that the citizens of Iraq chose. They are traitors to their own country. They are fascists; they do not want to recognize democratic rule. They don't want to share power with anyone. They want to exacerbate the tensions between ethnic and religious sects. We are not the enemy. The insurgents are. After we defeated Saddam's army, not one more person had to die. The insurgents are responsible for every death since that date. We liberated Iraq from a brutal tyrant.

Keep this in mind: some wars have to be fought. Hitler would never have given up his quest for domination of Europe. We had to keep pounding away at the influence of the USSR because they wanted world domination under Communism. Aren't you happy we didn't give up these battles?

Answer 2

I imagine there are a number of who wondered how appeasing cowards like Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain were elected Prime Minister. Do you not understand your own electoral system?

Gordon Brown has not been elected. Following the resignation of an incumbent the party in power chooses a replacement who must eventually go to the people in a General Election, which will ratify or reject the party and its leader.

While I am most definitely not a fan of the Bush league and its syncophantic lickspittles from the extreme right, there was nothing inherently wrong about removing a man who practiced genocide on the Kurdish minority and executed prisoners by bleeding them out, and then sold the blood to the Red Cross. The mistake that was made was in remaining as an occupying force, and in not allowing for the power vaccuum that a complete overthrow of the government would entail.

Gordon Brown is placed in the unenviable position of having to clean up the errors made by an American President, when he has no control over what that particularly sociopathic individual can do. Yes, he can pull British troops out, but there would be horrible costs to that in honour and in the stregth of Britain's international relationships.

However, before you get all righteous, I suggest you read a few editorial pages from the 1930s. Those hysteric letters to the editor demanding that Britain leave Germany alone and let Europe work out its petty differences were written by your spiritual mentors.

So go vomit, if that makes you feel better. That's how the rest of felt in 1936. Were three years of safety worth the shame of appeasement? Did our failure to support our allies prevent the Blitz?

The American reason for Iraqi intervention was childish spite and distractionary politics, but for once they did some good. They simply stayed too long. Gordion Brown can do some good by pointing that out, and putting a deadline on withdrawal. Give the man some time in the job to figure that out.

And remember, last time the appeasers were wrong. Be less sure you are not.

Answer 3

Gordon Brown was put into office at the last election because his party was put in office. The county didn't vote for Blair, they voted for labour. Labour could change their leader every week if they wanted to.

I think that this is wrong, and that there should always be an election when the party change their leader. Trouble is labour will win hands down - the liberal democrats aren't powerful enough to challange them and the conservative party are an absolute waste of space. We've got Brown, and he's going nowhere.

Answer 4

Well, he was being groomed for years, so it wasn't a surprise... still... I think there will be an early election.

Answer 5

The world is losing its mind.

I personally believe that mankind is deevolving.

Answer 6

He is not pro-war. He is pro security and has realized that placating ( look it up) Islams is very dangerous and has obviously not worked.