http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070901/tpl-uk-britain-iraq-jackson-43a8d4f_4.html
Why are our PMs, especially Blair, such shameless brown-nosers?
Why can't they put their country ahead of their ego?
2007-09-01 03:24:32 · 13 answers · asked by Y 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Read the link to Yahoo News for Gen Jackson's full comments - they are DEFINITELY worth reading.
2007-09-01 03:30:31 · update #1
Americans are not only intellectually bankrupt, but mentally, morally and financially as well.
2007-09-01 03:34:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 2⤋
Sounds right. The sooner that our troops are back home the better, and that goes for Afghanistan, we have a defence force run from the Ministry of Defence not the Ministry of War. Of course both Blair and Brown have the biggest egos in the world, just behind Bush.
2007-09-01 03:56:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gee....I WONDER why Jackson had a beef with the US to begin with?
Lo and behold...we have Clinton appointee and socialist scumbag Wesely Clark to thank for it!
In 1997 Jackson was appointed Commander of the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps. He served in the NATO chain of command as a deputy to the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Wesley Clark. In this capacity, he is best known for refusing, in June 1999, to block the runways of the Russian-occupied Pristina Airport, to isolate the Russian troops there.[1]. Had he complied with General Clark's order, there was a chance the British troops under his command could have come into armed conflict with the Russians; doing this without prior orders from Britain would have led to his dismissal for gross insubordination. On the other hand, defying Clark would have meant disobeying a direct order from a superior NATO officer (Clark was a four-star general; Jackson only a three-star). Jackson ultimately chose the latter course of action, reputedly saying "I won't start World War III for you."
2007-09-01 03:41:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
In answer to the bulls**t from Booman above, Harold Wilson refused Britain's help in Vietnam.
AND Thatcher opposed Reagan over Grenada - did that do the supposed "Special Relationship" any harm?
Blair should be tried for treason.
2007-09-01 03:38:31 · answer #4 · answered by James T 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
well i am for a military party, i mean we dont actualy have anybody running the country right now, but there are plenty of self centered manipulators, by the way have you all not realised that the door to the real leadership of britain is wide open, there is no non european gov, that means all those politicians are illegal traitors, theres a outworn cliche, about generals not making good politicians,but the worse politicians are the politicians, so go for it chaps, leta have a joint military civilian party.
2007-09-01 11:13:43 · answer #5 · answered by trucker 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He didn't mean the Americans, as in the people, were "intellectually bankrupt" just the current administration and how they have handled the "reconstruction" of Iraq.
2007-09-01 03:51:07 · answer #6 · answered by adam w 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
General Jackson shows what this country used to be like. These politicians make me puke each time they open their mouths. One min they say something then the next its a grovelling apology!!
God help us with these spineless morons running our army.
2007-09-01 08:35:17 · answer #7 · answered by K. Marx iii 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's so true.. hopefully they finally get informed about something and vote a decent individual like Ron Paul into the White House..
2007-09-01 03:36:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes it definitely was worth the read, thank you.
2007-09-01 03:47:13 · answer #9 · answered by ~Celtic~Saltire~ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing new then. New Labour are just traitorous t^ats.
2007-09-01 04:10:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋