Did you know the current Prime Minister of England is trying to change the law so we cannot enter more wars?

Question

Like that in Iraq. Without a referendum(public vote)?

He has called the war unjust and it is not the will of the people here.

Answer 1

And if you believe that, you'll believe anything.......

Answer 2

He's trying to change the law so that the Prime Minister can't send troops in without the approval of parliament. The public only get a say at general elections and then it's only a choice between rival warmongers and the nutters.

It's all a smoke screen. It would be most unusual for parliament not to rubber stamp what the Prime Minister decides. The only purpose of the new law is so that next time, there's no chance of the Prime Minister being indicted for war crimes. That way, Gordon won't need to get himself a job with diplomatic immunity (like Tony's) when he leaves office.

Answer 3

So why did he give his full support to the last unnecessary and illegal war?

Not the traditional definition of trustworthiness and integrity.

Perhaps if we could change the law to prevent dishonest and unjust Prime Ministers and politicians we would kill two birds with one stone and millions would be vastly better off?

Maybe it's the law that allows unjust and self seeking voters to elect unsuitable politicians that needs to be changed? Do we not get what we deserve?


Do you really want to trust the voters? Shouldn't we be guided by what is right and just rather than what people want? Look at our track record. Who are these people who have elected such low quality politicians?
Isn't this the root of our problems? What the people want and politicians without principles riding on that?

Who can deliver us out of this downward slide?

Answer 4

You are mistaken. All Gordon Brown is going to change is the need to refer any decision to go to war to Parliament first. Currently this is not necessary.

There would never,ever be a referendum on going to war. That is why we elect politicians - they make these very difficult decisions on our behalf.

In any case, how do you know the war in Iraq is not the will of the British people? Most people couldn't give a toss, they don't even bother to vote in elections, shame on them.

Maybe you'd prefer it if Saddam were still in power. Hmm.

Answer 5

I'm struggling to find anything compatible with reality in any of that.

For a start, England doesn't have a Prime Minister. You just made that up. I think you made up the rest of it, too.

Britain has a Prime Minister. He isn't even English. He's Scottish.

Answer 6

I hope you are right, because it reflects my vision of true democracy. A situation where the PEOPLE govern a country, and get full authority to decide on everything.

My position is that the government exists to SERVE the people, not to GOVERN over them.

But the last I heard, he was planning to sign a lot of UK's power to the EU, essentially making us a state of Europe, as opposed to a country. But then we are a state, anyways. A 51st state of America.

Answer 7

Doesn't sound like our Gord, who I'm sure voted in favour of the Iraq war.

Answer 8

Ebeneezer Brooon doesn't give a Monkeys what the British people think - he is power crazed.... he doesn't do referendums - he is PM - without being voted in as PM...so he thinks there is no need to ask Joe Public anything,

Answer 9

if that was true, it wouldn't be a bad thing considering that when the british troops were sent over to Iraq they were not even fully equiped for dessert conditions.

Answer 10

Good, Blair acted like a dictator and should be ashamed of his actions. Its about time Prime Ministers realised they respresent the people and their viewpoints, they cannot do as they please.

Answer 11

i think it is a good idea.no more wars what a dream.