Originally Posted By ecdc <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/20/uk.iraq.troops/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/ meast/02/20/uk.iraq.troops/index.html</a> According to CNN.com, Blair is proposing a timetable for withdrawal. 3,000 of the 7,000 troops will be out of Iraq by the end of the year.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Not quite. According to CNN.com, British tabloids claim PM Blair is proposing a timetable for withdrawal. There's certainly no word from Mr Blair that this is so.
Originally Posted By ecdc Does that mean you're disputing it? Because MSNBC is reporting that they received confirmation from the White House. Also, saying "not quite" isn't accurate at all. My post referred to CNN, which is reporting it, among other reputable agencies who have gotten confirmation from other sources. But you're just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. When this is announced tomorrow, you'll have your talking points and spin ready.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad Well I like Tony. He's a good egg. He's been there for us all along the way.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Does that mean you're disputing it?> That would depend upon what "it" you're referring to. I think it's pretty obvious that I took exception to your summation of the report. <Also, saying "not quite" isn't accurate at all.> Sure it is. <My post referred to CNN, which is reporting it, among other reputable agencies who have gotten confirmation from other sources.> If they are, then there must be an additional report than you linked to, because in that one, CNN is reporting what others are reporting. It may be that Mr Blair will propose a troop withdrawal, but he hasn't yet. <But you're just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.> No, I'm being accurate. I realize that's not a concern of yours. <When this is announced tomorrow, you'll have your talking points and spin ready.> Good thing you got yours ready now, huh?
Originally Posted By SuperDry This thread reminds me of what the noise machine does whenever there's an uncomfortable issue at hand: instead of talking about the issue, pick apart some minute part of the way the "mainstream media" has covered it. Pretty soon, attention has moved away from the uncomfortable issue that they don't want to discuss.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder From the updated CNN article: "Blair will tell the House of Commons Wednesday that 1,500 soldiers will return to Britain within weeks, and 3,000 will follow suit by the end of the year, The Sun newspaper reported. Britain has a contingent of 7,000 in Iraq now, based mostly in the southern city of Basra." " Blair had discussed his plans with U.S. President George W. Bush during a videoconference Tuesday morning, the White House said. It portrayed the news from Britain as a sign of progress in the nearly 4-year-old war. "We're pleased that conditions in Basra have improved sufficiently that they are able to transition more control to the Iraqis," National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. "The United States shares the same goal of turning responsibility over to the Iraqi Security Forces and reducing the number of American troops in Iraq." A senior U.S. administration official compared Blair's plan to the one offered by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group in December." So Blair is definitely pulling out. We should be next.
Originally Posted By DAR Read the first sentence of this article: <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070221/ap_on_re_mi_ea/britain_iraq" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 70221/ap_on_re_mi_ea/britain_iraq</a> The word "if" is used in there. If that region can be secured.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Grasping at straws. "If". Blair's pulling out the troops, or he's a political dead man.
Originally Posted By DAR I'm not really grasping at anything, I was just commenting on what the first sentence states. I hope that Britan is able to pull their troops out and we will follow suit. The only thing I don't like is the announcing of when the pullout is going to occur. I say just start packing up one day and leave.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<He pretty much already is a pollitical dead man....>> He could always hope another Princess dies. Blair handles that almost as well as Bush handles appearances on WTC rubble.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<He pretty much already is a pollitical dead man....>> I think what jovn is implying is that PM Tony Blair had already let everyone know that he will not be serving his full term. There will be a new PM (selected among his party ) before his term is over.
Originally Posted By jonvn Yep, he's gone. Actually, he has a lot of sympathy from the people in England, at least the ones I have talked to, but they still think he should go.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ecdc >>That would depend upon what "it" you're referring to. I think it's pretty obvious that I took exception to your summation of the report.<< Except the report, despite your wishful thinking, turned out to be true. But let's review what you "took exception to". I said: >According to CNN.com, Blair is proposing a timetable for withdrawal. 3,000 of the 7,000 troops will be out of Iraq by the end of the year.< I said "according to CNN.com" and your big response was "not quite." No, it really was according to CNN. But why should I be surprised that you could find issue with that. >>Sure it is.<< No, it isn't. >>If they are, then there must be an additional report than you linked to, because in that one, CNN is reporting what others are reporting. It may be that Mr Blair will propose a troop withdrawal, but he hasn't yet.<< And I had already said other news organizations confirmed it, but true to form, you ignored that. As I said, you certainly can't hang your hat on Bush's accomplishments (there are none), so you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. Ok, here's a link to Blair's announcement: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/21/uk.iraq.troops/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/ meast/02/21/uk.iraq.troops/index.html</a> What's your excuse now? By the way, Denmark and Lithuania are also removing their troops. >>No, I'm being accurate. I realize that's not a concern of yours.<< No, you're being difficult. CNN reported, as did several other news organizations, that Blair would announce a timetable for removal. I posted it here. It was confirmed by Blair today. Yet you decided to put up a fight about even the simplest of news stories. But again, in a positively Clintonesque way, you manage to argue over the meaning of the word "is". >>Good thing you got yours ready now, huh?<< Actually, you'll note my original post had no commentary or posturing at all. I merely posted the link and said that CNN is reporting that Blair would remove troops. Period. You took issue with it, so I responded.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I have a LOT of time for TonyBlair. He is a leader and other than theIraq debacle, I've supported 90% of his policies. He is also a very nice guy on the couple of occassions I have met him. However, his cards are marked, the media really has it in for him, and the average joe on the street has lost respect, therefore he will be going. Back on thread, although I was against the war, I really hope we do not all leave Iraq in civil war. Otherwise, it's our fault and we will just be leaving it behind. Not cool. It's also very ironic that the announcement for withdrawl came less than 24 hours after it was reported that a member of the royal family would be shipping out to Iraq - coincedence?
Originally Posted By ElKay It's all so pathetic that the Bush Admin. and especially Cheney spins the withdrawl of a major part of the the British contingent as a sign of the success of the Iraq quagmire. If the Brits were doing such a great job in Basra, why aren't they using their expertise in showing the US generals how to "suceed" in Baghdad? Furthermore, why aren't those departing UK soldiers redeploying to Baghdad? If American soldiers and Iraqi civilians weren't dying this Admin's pronouncements would be funny, but it's not in the least. Tony Blair will forever be tarred in British history as Bush's poodle, willing to do whatever bidding his "master" calls for. Finally in the few months remaing in office, the "poodle" finally decides to run off and lick his wounds. Anyone knows when Bush will award Tony Blair the Medal of Freedom? I'm sure George Tenant and Paul Bremmer will be on hand to shake Blair's hand at the ceremony. ;-)
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>He is also a very nice guy on the couple of occassions I have met him.>>> I knew England was small and all but geez... I suppose you've had tea with the Queen, too?
