tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post116072983637229654..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Should He Stay or Should He GoIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160920771738815712006-10-15T14:59:00.000+01:002006-10-15T14:59:00.000+01:00Tapestry writes: Verity. Heads of Armed Forces wi...Tapestry writes: <I>Verity. Heads of Armed Forces with lifelong careers behind them are not often given to making statements which would terminate their careers in disgrace. Sir Richard has his pension to worry about. He's only 55. The price of whistleblowing under Blair has been universally brutal.</I><BR/><BR/>True. But Blair is irrelevant in this instance, as is the opinion of Broon. Neither one of them can sack Sir Richard or advance him. Only the Queen can do that, and I have a feeling that the message he delivered does, in fact, come from HM.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160919283915378292006-10-15T14:34:00.000+01:002006-10-15T14:34:00.000+01:00I doubt if Brown's opinions influenced Dannat a jo...I doubt if Brown's opinions influenced Dannat a jot.<BR/><BR/>In fact I think if Blair thought Brown was behind him then he WOULD have fired him.<BR/><BR/>Of course to believe that I would have to think Blair a very petty minded short-sighted man with no concern for British constitutionality.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160908653501175072006-10-15T11:37:00.000+01:002006-10-15T11:37:00.000+01:00Poor shotgun (above) seems to know SFA about the U...<I>Poor shotgun (above) seems to know SFA about the UK's unwritten constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>Unwritten constitution?<BR/><BR/><I>The troops' loyalty may be to 'the Queen' but this does indeed mean in effect to the policies of the Prime Minister as 'Commander in Chief', since Parliament is never let near day-to-day or even month-to-month affairs of war. It is a purely executive function,</I><BR/><BR/>The PM is not the CinC, and this shows what a mong you are to try and state such. The PM is asked to form a Government, but the people are represented by the whole of Parliament.<BR/><BR/>Once the troops are then yes, the Government does control the situation as the executive, but that's not what we are talking about.<BR/><BR/>It's a shame the likes of you don't get better informed, like Greg, who I respect more because at least he signed his name. What yopu are suggesting is what was outlawed hundreds of years ago when Cromwell was outed, and later after his death hung drawn and quartered.<BR/><BR/>Parliament has the power, but because Bliar has it full of his bumboys and because he is willing to lie, he gets his way.<BR/><BR/><B> Fucking idiots like you seem to believe that Bliar, or any PM, can take us to war against...say France and there is nothing anyone can do because they have the power</B><BR/><BR/>This is not a dictatorship between elections, even if it is run by a cabinet dictatorship. Are you honestly suggesting that the only function of Parliament is to decide the numbers of who gets to be PM?<BR/><BR/>Mongs, and very badly informed mongs at that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160907952987034462006-10-15T11:25:00.000+01:002006-10-15T11:25:00.000+01:00Greg said... Shotgun, I'm afraid you are talkin...<I>Greg said...<BR/><BR/> Shotgun, I'm afraid you are talking rubbish. The Govt didn't have to have a vote on the war in 2003. Technically they wouldn't even have had to follow the outcome of the vote had the Commons voted no.</I><BR/><BR/>I'm not talking rubbish, and most people with sense know it.<BR/><BR/>Bliar or the sitting Government cannot arbitrarily send troops to war, unless there is a threat to the UK.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160900495584651642006-10-15T09:21:00.000+01:002006-10-15T09:21:00.000+01:00He should stay, if the opposition were doing the j...He should stay, if the opposition were doing the job properly, he woud not have had to have done their job for them.Johnny Norfolkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900659617233793880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160877947387228042006-10-15T03:05:00.000+01:002006-10-15T03:05:00.000+01:00Griswold and Hatfield Girl caused me to remember; ...Griswold and Hatfield Girl caused me to remember; it was Hitler's vanity that caused him to forbid withdrawals that cost his men so dear. Are Bush/Blair up the same pole?<BR/><BR/>Reread Hatfield Girl, slowly. <BR/>She is spot on the money.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160863127137936342006-10-14T22:58:00.000+01:002006-10-14T22:58:00.000+01:00"realist said... As an ex regular myself, I would ..."realist said... <BR/>As an ex regular myself, I would much prefer to see a military junta running this country"<BR/><BR/>which is where such things lead.<BR/><BR/>Do you think there might be a place in a military governmant for an elderly ex corporal? I could do with a couple of years on £60k just before my pension.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160861378969472502006-10-14T22:29:00.000+01:002006-10-14T22:29:00.000+01:00Verity. Heads of Armed Forces with lifelong caree...Verity. Heads of Armed Forces with lifelong careers behind them are not often given to making statements which would terminate their careers in disgrace. Sir Richard has his pension to worry about. He's only 55. The price of whistleblowing under Blair has been universally brutal. <BR/><BR/>Yes Dannatt's man of principle, but he's also likely to have taken a calculated risk, not a completely impulsive one. He would certainly have had an eye to who would back him. And in the current atmosphere in Westminster, he would have known that Gordon Brown would be delighted if he humiliated Blair.<BR/><BR/>The question is was he assuming he would have Gordon Brown's backing, or did he know?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160855112758337322006-10-14T20:45:00.000+01:002006-10-14T20:45:00.000+01:00I don't think Sir Richard gives a toss about "risk...I don't think Sir Richard gives a toss about "risking blair's anger" one way or the other.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160854731876281152006-10-14T20:38:00.000+01:002006-10-14T20:38:00.000+01:00griswold - Richard North at EU Referendum has a le...griswold - Richard North at <A HREF="http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/10/before-defeat-becomes-rout.html" REL="nofollow">EU Referendum</A> has a lengthy post arguing that Dannatt is acting with the full approval of the government, as part of a political strategy to "extract the Army from Iraq in one piece".<BR/><BR/>verity - to interpret an officer speaking out of turn (or not, if North is right) as a "military coup" is simply paranoid.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160852856623407272006-10-14T20:07:00.000+01:002006-10-14T20:07:00.000+01:00Was General Dannatt's criticism cleared in advance...Was General Dannatt's criticism cleared in advance with Gordon Brown? If the Sec of State was backing him, it might suggest that Gordon Brown sees this is an effective way to lever Blair out of power.<BR/><BR/>And Dannatt would feel able to run the risk of incurring Blair's anger if he knew Brown was behind the initiative.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160841150110407182006-10-14T16:52:00.000+01:002006-10-14T16:52:00.000+01:00Well, Keir, as I said above, I believe this was a ...Well, Keir, as I said above, I believe this was a very low-key military coup.<BR/><BR/>I think blair has been relieved of his power, although he'll be allowed to stay in Downing St, but I think we are going to see a new agenda - re Iraq, re Afghanistan, re muslims, re the trashing of Christianity that has taken place, re this multiculti garbage. This will be imposed on blair, who I think will be encouraged to leave office nicely. And soon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160836105109065122006-10-14T15:28:00.000+01:002006-10-14T15:28:00.000+01:00Agree completely with Matthew Parris. Agre complet...Agree completely with Matthew Parris. Agre completely with what he said, but as a soldier he can't set a precedent for questioning his orders. Certainly not in a public forum.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160835843437835492006-10-14T15:24:00.000+01:002006-10-14T15:24:00.000+01:00Consider the statements of General Sir Richard Dan...Consider the statements of General Sir Richard Dannatt as military rather than political and the frightening prospect appears that there might be a defeat awaiting the British Army if it is not withdrawn in good order and in recognition that what it could do, it has done; Iraq is a political failure, let's hope it doesn't become a military disaster.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160835779019193882006-10-14T15:22:00.000+01:002006-10-14T15:22:00.000+01:00Malcom Rifkind is right. So is Chas Moore in Spect...Malcom Rifkind is right. So is Chas Moore in Spectator. The General is engaging in politics. Why. Its is because of the magnitude of catastrophe facing both our army and the country that was Iraq. He knows BlairBush are in denial and that a catalyst is required to get some bleeding common sense introduced. Blair's vanity does not allow retreat so he uses soldiers' and Iraqi civilian blood to assuage his concience. The General's concience, a sounder one, has spoken. We should not be there nor in Afghanistan.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160833836803655072006-10-14T14:50:00.000+01:002006-10-14T14:50:00.000+01:00lagwolf - He's not answerable to the prime ministe...lagwolf - He's not answerable to the prime minister. His Commander in Chief is HM. For all we know, he was doing her bidding.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160830571293811342006-10-14T13:56:00.000+01:002006-10-14T13:56:00.000+01:00He should go; he is serving in the military and ha...He should go; he is serving in the military and has undermind the sitting Prime Minister. I believe its called mutiny.Andrew Ian Dodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16293965494182995460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160829932115823882006-10-14T13:45:00.000+01:002006-10-14T13:45:00.000+01:00Tony is going to do what Sir Richard tells him to ...Tony is going to do what Sir Richard tells him to do. He has ceded power to him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160826378358087522006-10-14T12:46:00.000+01:002006-10-14T12:46:00.000+01:00I was impressed by Malcolm Rifkind coming out & sa...I was impressed by Malcolm Rifkind coming out & saying that while he agreed with the general he shouldn't have said it & by implication that blair should have fired him.<BR/><BR/>"realist said... <BR/>As an ex regular myself, I would much prefer to see a military junta running this country"<BR/><BR/>which is where such things lead.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160820217961085832006-10-14T11:03:00.000+01:002006-10-14T11:03:00.000+01:00iain not dale - He can't be sacked by anyone but H...<I>iain not dale - He can't be sacked by anyone but HM. Why are you people so cowed by the the alastair and tony double act?<BR/><BR/>It doesn't matter how angry tony is - except, he won't be very angry because he has no rudder; no beliefs. He won't be stirred, except by fear. </I><BR/><BR/>Cowed?!?!<BR/><BR/>It is precisely because of the overwhelming vocal support of all ranks for General Dannatt, that Bliar's hands are tied.<BR/><BR/>The Armed Forces expect higher standards of their military and political leaders than wider society. "Truth" and "integrity" are seen as fundamentals of leadership. General Dannatt is living up to these expectations, unlike some of his predecessors. His honest and forthright views have also struck a chord in wider society, who are fed up of the lies and dissembling over Iraq.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160812268957260712006-10-14T08:51:00.000+01:002006-10-14T08:51:00.000+01:00Richard Dannatt was referring to not just Iraq but...Richard Dannatt was referring to not just Iraq but society in general in the UK but unfortunately, this aspect, central to him and to his remarks, is being passed over by most commentators. I wrote about this.James Highamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14525082702330365464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160810140541794062006-10-14T08:15:00.000+01:002006-10-14T08:15:00.000+01:00Poor shotgun (above) seems to know SFA about the U...Poor shotgun (above) seems to know SFA about the UK's unwritten constitution.<BR/><BR/>The troops' loyalty may be to 'the Queen' but this does indeed mean in effect to the policies of the Prime Minister as 'Commander in Chief', since Parliament is never let near day-to-day or even month-to-month affairs of war. It is a purely executive function,<BR/><BR/>The PM of course is meant to be aided and advised by a Cabinet, but Blair's attitude to the creeps he surrounds himself with is pretty much the same as Margaret Thatcher's in the famous 'Spitting Image' sketch about the Cabinet dinner:<BR/><BR/>Waiter: ". . .and the vegetables?"<BR/><BR/>MT: "They'll have the same as ME!!"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160788359504804952006-10-14T02:12:00.000+01:002006-10-14T02:12:00.000+01:00Shotgun - Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!Also, d'accord.Shotgun - Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!<BR/><BR/>Also, d'accord.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160787940636520442006-10-14T02:05:00.000+01:002006-10-14T02:05:00.000+01:00How very interesting ... Sir Richard Dannant is n...How very interesting ... Sir Richard Dannant is now in control of British foreign policy. Blair was frightened to cock his leg and do a little territorial wee over what he would have regarded as his own territory. So he lost it.<BR/>A very British coup. Tony isn't in charge any more.<BR/><BR/>The military is. <BR/><BR/>No unseemly fighting on the streets, or anything. Understated, that's our style.<BR/><BR/>I love the way this is playing out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1160783108717079512006-10-14T00:45:00.000+01:002006-10-14T00:45:00.000+01:00Soldiers know wrong then, Shotgun. Parliamentary a...<I>Soldiers know wrong then, Shotgun. Parliamentary approval is not required for a government to commit British troops.</I><BR/><BR/>No, soldiers know right. You should read the rest of the post where I say that only under certain circumstances does the Government have the right to take our troops to war.<BR/><BR/>This was not one of those cases.<BR/><BR/><I>Indeed, HMQ was persuaded to prevent even a discussion of this in parliament as recently as five years ago.</I><BR/><BR/>Parliament narrowly allowed the troops to be deployed to Iraq in 2003...Bliar needed the dodgy dossier to persuade Parliament to vote in favour of what he wanted. Parliament is not the Government. Parliament, as a whole, represents the people, and the people command the troops.<BR/><BR/><I>So it could easily be said, especially under this government, that British troops are serving (and when have they not) in furtherance of British foreign policy - set by government.</I><BR/><BR/>But it isn't. The troops are serving under Parliaments voted intentions.<BR/><BR/>Don't you remember Bliar saying he would resign if he did not get the vote passed through Parliament for the troops to be deployed to Iraq? If Bliar wanted to commit the troops by the Government policy or wish alone, without Parliament voting on it, he would first have to declare a state of emergency and invoke various laws.<BR/><BR/>I repeat, the government and parliament are two different things, and Bliar has only one single vote in Parliament, and this is why he had to lie to get the troops deployed in 2003.<BR/><BR/>This is a very common misconception, but as I said, the troops know differently.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com