Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief

TrueLabour Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 07:20:16 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

The statement by the Army Chief is a mortal blow to Tony Blair's Leadership.

Blair can fire the Chief but the Chief has started a fire under Blair's Iraq policy that cannot be quenched.

No longer can Blair claim that we need to stay in and support the troops.    The troops dont want that support they just want us to get out.

It is also a sign that Blair's grip on power has gone as people are now prepared to openly challenge him.






tags: (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief | 6 comments (6 topical)

Re: Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief (#1)

by swatantra on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 08:47:03 AM GMT

Blair can't fire him, the Chief has only been recently appointed. Blair should listen very carefully to the assessment on the ground. The trouble all along has been that none of our politicians in charge has ever seen active service, so they don't know what they are talking about. Des Browne is useless Defence, as was Buff Hoon, and he's the one that should go.
Oh and bring back conscription and gets these louts off our streets.


Re: Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief (#4)

by bornin84 on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 10:33:13 AM GMT

Who would you have as Defence Secretary then? I understand the arguement that someone with military experience should be Defence Sec. But then should we only let a Doctor or Nurse run the Department of Health or a teacher the Education Department. Maybe only a pensioner should be in charge of pensions policy!

Maybe it is actually quite healthy to have someone from outside the military to run it. A healthy mature democracy of course should have clear distinctions between the military and the government. Whether some soldiers like it or not, they are there to do the political will of the governing party.


[ Parent ]

Re: Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief (#2)

by Glass House on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 12:33:33 PM GMT

It's amazing that Sir Richard Dannatt said this. How did he get to be Army Chief when he's clearly so willing to flout the chain of command? Disgraceful.

He deserves to be sacked on the spot. Unfortunately, for political reasons, he can't be (mainly because idiots would think he'd been sacked for disagreeing with the government - rather than showing a lack of respect for the chain of command)

sigh


Re: Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief (#3)

by HOWLERMONKEY on Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 01:11:11 PM GMT

I think not..More Blair vageley pissed off by Army Chief Cockup.


[ Parent ]

Re: Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief (#5)

by Blackadder on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 07:36:43 PM GMT

Sir Richard Dannatt is the Chief of the General Staff - his only two direct superiors are the Chief of the Defence Staff (Air Chief Marshall Sir Jock Stirrup) and the Queen. Even this is debatable, as the Air Force is the junior service and therefore a General in the British Army is technically superior to his equivlent rank in the Royal Air Force (Air Chief Marshall).

At any rate, i wasn't aware that Tony Blair had a greater military knowledge than the highest ranking career soldier in the country. Dannatt's comments were taken out of context anyway.


[ Parent ]

Re: Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief (#6)

by Glass House on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 09:10:20 AM GMT

I fear for the future of democracy when people are so ignorant of democratic principles that we get comments like "At any rate, i wasn't aware that Tony Blair had a greater military knowledge than the highest ranking career soldier in the country" in response to this topic. Really sad.


[ Parent ]

Blair mortally wounded by Army Chief | 6 comments (6 topical)