Comments on: The War Against Terror – how Conservative fortunes could finally be changing

By: O'Brian

O'Brian — Fri, 28 Feb 2003 09:20:28 +0000

And any pro-European case, even if it sounds plausible and pro-American, will induce bile.

Plausibile – another well-rounded neologism.

By: Patrick Crozier

Patrick Crozier — Fri, 28 Feb 2003 06:14:19 +0000

But Europe is still an issue and one that the War on Terrorism has and will bring into sharp relief. We are very soon going to find out where the Eurofanatics stand: will they back the US or Europe?

Of course, with the Group of Eight forming a counter-weight to the Franco-German Axis, Blair can now make a plausibile pro-American case for an active European policy.

By: Daniel Schmidt

Daniel Schmidt — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:37:19 +0000

Louis,
“He who strikes first wins. Its as simple as that.”

I not convinced of the truth of this. The WTC attack was a first strike, but I don’t know how much of a win resulted, Pyrrhic or otherwise. I can see how the ’67 Israelis might have viewed retaliation as obsolete, but what modern terrorist targets would be hopelessly crippled in one blow?

By: John J. Coupal

John J. Coupal — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:09:41 +0000

It appears that society has arrived at having to choose between the “telegenic and competent” and the “telegenic and incompetent” candidate.

One of the liabilities of television, I guess.

We Yanks learned that after 8 years of Bubba. [He would be the latter].

By: Patrick W

Patrick W — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:03:35 +0000

Brian is right I think. But the Tory battlefield in this war will mostly be fought not in the international war on terror but in the EU. There will be a continuing US push for the whole Arab world to reform. There will be a continuing US push to foster an Atlanticist and genuinely friendly alternative to the Franco / German axis in Europe. The trench fighting on where the EU ‘project’ is going hasn’t even got started. Wait until the eastern Eurpoean nations join in.

Since the Tories, for all their internal strife, are predominantly anti Brussels, pro free markets, favour self determination over state or ‘group’ allegiances and are pro-US, the pull of history and realpolitik over the next few years will be more favourable for them. I suspect (and hope) that if push ever comes to shove when this split in the ‘West’ gets really nasty, and Briatin has to choose between allying itself with Washington or Brussels, that we will go with Washington. If not I’ll be first in the queue for a Green Card.

By: Louis Robinson`

Louis Robinson` — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 10:14:58 +0000

I agree with you. Not many politicians (and hardly any UK voters) have come to terms with the new reality – actually its an old reality we simply ignored for decades. Since the 50s terrorists have been emboldened by weak responses and now they mean business. They look at the UN and yesterday’s speeches in the British parliament and are heartened. They watch ‘good people’ debating and see it as weakness. The message given to Saddam Hussein by the Labour MP’s revolt is one of hope. “I can still escape” he thinks. “I can still get away with it.” The ‘good people’ of the political establishment will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into a world in which “retaliation” is an obsolete concept. Its a hell of a difficult problem- but I would feel happier if some of the MPs yesterday were thinking about the New Reality, not fighting old wars fueled by anti-Americanism, the class struggle and political ambition.
But do we have time? He who strikes first wins. Its as simple as that.

By: O'Brian

O'Brian — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 10:03:58 +0000

The next few months will demonstrate whether the Conservative are moving beyond their ‘core support’. Despite the political debates over Iraq, voting intentions remain linked to the standard of living and levels of taxation. When the NICs and council tax increases hit after April, we will see if te Tories benefit from disillusionment with the government’s reputation for ‘economic competence’.

However, yesterday’s debate demonstrated that Labour is as divided on Iraq as the Tories are on Europe. If Brian’s thesis holds water, the only leader who will gain is Charles Kennedy and the party that will do well in the local elections is the Liberal Democrats.

Divsion on Iraq within Labour may have the unfortunate consequence of consigning the Tories to ‘third party’ status.

By: Sean Hackbarth

Sean Hackbarth — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 09:31:20 +0000

I watched a little of the debate yesterday, but I heard plenty of criticism from the Conservatives. Kenneth Clarke sounded as weak-kneed as any member of the U.S. Democratic Party. I guess appearances are deceiving.

By: Steven Den Beste

Steven Den Beste — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 07:37:01 +0000

Just to make something clear: what Bush said was “Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.” The difference is subtle, but what he was trying to say was that anyone who tried to stay neutral was effectively aiding the terrorists.

Which Indonesia found out was true in Bali.

I do find it odd (but pleasing) that Blair survived a challenge from within his own party because he gained support from the opposition. Y’all got a strange system, know that?