Impeach Blair before he steps down (ex-Head of SAS)

Post Reply New Topic

Impeach Blair before he steps down (ex-Head of SAS)

Impeach Blair before he steps down


Prime Minister Tony Blair must be impeached before he leaves office over the Iraq war because of the catastrophe it has caused to the country's armed forces, one of Britain's most distinguished generals warned Friday.

"Iraq has been such a serious setback to Britain's standing in the world, Blair should be held accountable in parliament. He cannot just walk away from this in a few weeks' time," General Sir Michael Rose said.

Rose, the former head of Britain's Elite SAS Force and Commander of UN Forces in Bosnia, accused the Prime Minister of being disingenuous about defence spending and of misleading MPs about the reasons for going to war in Iraq.

His call for the Prime Minister to be brought to account over the Iraq war follows the failure of attempts by several backbench MPs to bring impeachment charges since the 2003 invasion. But Rose insisted that the Iraq war had also broken the chain of command because military chiefs are no longer trusted by their men.

It was the politicization of the army that was one of the most damaging developments under Blair's 10 years in power, he said. "If Blair had been a director of Enron (the American energy firm which spectacularly collapsed in 2001 after massive accountancy fraud), he would be doing 40 years" in jail, he said.

Rose, who retired from military life in 1997, underlined his opposition to the invasion of Iraq from the start, by saying that if he had been chief of general staff, he would have resigned.

"I would not have been prepared to sign up to that war," he said. "Iraq has undermined the military ethos. You trust troops to do the ultimate, but they trust you not to throw them into situations that are pointless and wasteful," he said.

The former general was also critical of the way the detention of 15 sailors by Iran in the Persian Gulf had been handled by the military as well as the government that was caused by political interference.

"If this had been solely controlled by the military - in otherwords, if there had been no political interference - the soldiers would have been taken from the aircraft, straight into secure accommodation," he said. "There would have been an initial inqui ry into what had happened: if there had been any blame attributed, negligence or failure to comply with standard operation procedures, then charges would have been brought," Rose explained.

He emphasised that charges should have been made and said that "senior officers should have been asked how come they all owed this situation to occur."

http://www.iribnews.ir/Full_en.asp?news_id=235004&n=35
11 comments







Only comments

Article and comments
Comments per page


This is excellent news!
by stоpwar on 14.04.2007 [09:06 ]
Interesting that Michael Rose chose the Iranian broadcasting media for this broadside against Blair. Suggests that the military in the UK really have had enough of Blair. I read somewhere earlier this week that if the people of Britain rise up against Blair's wicked government, the army will take the side of the people. Interesting times indeed!


Action!
by laertes on 14.04.2007 [09:24 ]
Impale the Poofter Poodle now!



Blair's party are supposed to be fighting an election atm...
by stоpwar on 14.04.2007 [09:53 ]
the "Impeach Him!" article is on newsnow.co.uk, and it is bound to go round the media.

Labour will be wiped out for sure if he DOESN'T at least resign. Maybe that is why Bush is talking to Gordon Brown now, rather than Blair.

Reminder: ht tp://petitions.pm.gov.uk/WarCriminalBlair/


Why impeach?
by VIETCONG on 14.04.2007 [10:01 ]
send him some Gurkhas


Sir Michael Rose will be sent to the Tower of London
by picard-fortune-500 on 14.04.2007 [11:06 ]
for advocating treason. Her Majesty will simply won't allow her favorite to leave her employ prematurely. Off with Sir Michael's head!


Just what I was about to say p-f-500
by Peter on 14.04.2007 [12:02 ]
However, he may just have the backing of some of his army friends and that can make a difference. The Russian Revolution would never have succeeded had it not be for the backup by them..
Perhaps we need a revolution in the UK, MINUS the zionist influence.


@picard
by stоpwar on 14.04.2007 [15:02 ]
From all that I've heard over the last couple of weeks, I think that the military would probably support Sir Michael, rather than Blair. So then what is Her Majesty to do? Interesting scenario.

@Peter
I'm sure he's not heroically stupid - he'll have the backing of folk like Paddy, for a start... But no revolution until the BBC starts telling the truth. Remember Rumania 1989?


Belatedly impeaching Bliar for all the wrong reasons
by BlackPanther on 14.04.2007 [16:09 ]
Prime Minister Tony Blair must be impeached before he leaves office over the Iraq war because of the catastrophe it has caused to the country's armed forces, one of Britain's most distinguished generals warned Friday.

"Iraq has been such a serious setback to Britain's standing in the world, Blair should be held accountable in parliament. He cannot just walk away from this in a few weeks' time," General Sir Michael Rose said.

First of all, what is conspicuous in Michael Rose's comments is the reason why he wants to "impeach" Blair. Basically, Blair has waged a failed war of aggression in Iraq (i.e. The British Imperial War Machine has suffered a catastrophe). And Britain's propaganda image ... er sorry "standing in the world" has suffered a setback. If Blair had waged a successful war of aggression? General Rose will be hailing him as a hero, no doubt.

And impeaching Blair as he is about to leave office is a little bit late, isn't it? What difference will it make, if he is going off into retirement anyway?

Hell, Tony Bliar deserves a whole lot more than impeachment. He deserves War Crimes Tribunals. Nothing less will do. Anything less is just a political whitewash.


BlackPanther
by hiles69@msn.com on 14.04.2007 [17:01 ]
I agree with you.

Stopwar:

I see you recently got savaged by one of our resident "Pol Pot wannabes".

I used to equate "left" with humanitarianism, tolerance, anti-violence and so on, but found out the hard way that the old saying is true, i.e. "If you go far enough left (become too doctrinal, for instance) then you end up on the right." What was there to choose between Stalin and Hitler, after all?

What is there to choose between the bLiar and Maggot Scratcher?

And so it goes all down the line, from big league despots to the little fish playing in the internet pond, or just in their family puddles.

Maybe I'll write a proper piece on this, but meanwhile the bLiar has done the damage and deserves far more than impeachment, but it won't happen.

BlackPanther is right that if the invasion of Iraq had gone better - from a British point of view - then we would not hear a peep out of the likes of Rose ... who apparently wants to rise from the sewer smelling of roses.

What was to stop him saying all this years ago?

Possibly cowardice - a fine trait in an SAS officer - coupled with a large dose of self-interest.




PS
by hiles69@msn.com on 14.04.2007 [17:29 ]
The analogy of rats leaving a sinking ship comes to mind, but I had a friend who kept pet rats and they are actually very nice creatures who, even in the wild, do not have a mean bone in their bodies, because they just do what rats do, without pretence. So it would be an insult to rats to compare Rose with rats.

It is tempting to equate Rose with a "pig at the trough" who has just found out that a feed can be had at another trough, but I have farmed pigs, know them very well and it is an insult on pigs to ever compare a human with them.

And so it goes with all the other animals used to analogize the very worst our species is capable of ... ALL of it solely belonging to our species, because NO other animal comes even close to the evils we do.

ALL, however, exhibit our best traits ... mother earwigs tend to their young as well as any good human mother does. Bet you didn't know that.

My dogs are as totally loyal as the best humans are to their nearest and dearest ... and so it goes.

Don't trust Michael Rose.


Small reminder
by intissar1 on 14.04.2007 [19:33 ]
> Rose was the former head of Britain's Elite SAS Force and Commander of UN Forces in Bosnia...

Let us not forget that that war was also neo-colonial and a war crime. While we are at it let us not forget another bedfellow the current pro-consul Paddy Ashdown of, yes, LibDem fame.

Wasn't there some stuff about him from Private Eye a few weeks back? About being on the gravy train or something?