Blair silence is correct

[Dom Tuk]

Its been a long time but you will be surprised that this time I am in agreement with Blair. His silence over the execution of Saddam is appropriate. There is no need to appear sanctimonius or triumphalist after his death. Saddam is gone, what Blair says is not important, the Iraqis dealt with this in their own way so time to move on. Correct decision Blair.

[kempie]

How could Blair possibly do or say anything to "appear sanctimonious or triumphalist" when he is the political leader of a country which has outlawed the death penalty. The only thing he would be able to do in this circumstance is to condemn the execution and he certainly will not do that.

[Pippa68]

I suppose the fact that he is sunning himself on a feebie holiday in Florida has nothing to do with his silence ;o)

I recall Blair has the 'on holiday, not at work' policy which is fair enough for a family man.

[kwicky]

The Iraq war has already cost over 100,000 lives many of them innocent civilians. If you were partially reponsible for this, is the death of 1 man likely to cause you any sleepless nights? Bush slept soundly throughout the execution I hear.

[sir.prize]

Both Blair and Bush each distanced themselves from this 'historical event' as it took place. Neither of them conveniently were 'at home' - Blair was holidaying in the States, and Bush was well away from home - he was way up in Texas!

As the execution allegedly took place at 06.00 hours Baghdad time, and they are nine hours ahead of Houston, Texas time - that must mean Bush was in bed before 9p.m. Sure seems early to me!!!!!!!

[kempie]

The execution took place at around 9:10pm Crawford, Texas time.

President Bush is notorious for being early-to-bed and former White House chief of staff Andrew Card has publicly confirmed that George W. and Laura aim "to go to bed at 9:00 or 9:30".

[whiffey]

Britain, and later on USA, were partially responsible for WW2 in which tens of millions died.

I slept through the Saddam execution as well. Now I am awake I am not using flimsy opportunities to attack Western leaders. Especially, as I always say, from the comfort of a Western armchair.

[Pippa68]

Oh yes whiffey..we were partially responsible. After all we couldn't just sit there and do/say nothing against injustice could we, eh?

Which way do you want it, love?

[jno]

it does rather seem that both Bush and Blair are trying hard to distance themselves from anything that happens in Iraq, which is understandable since it's left both of them badly wounded as politicians and probably will be a millstone around their neck for decades. So I think Blair staying silent on the subject is probably just trying to pretend he had nothing to do with it. Other people may think this is just more deceit.

[smudge]

Eh? It's patently obvious why 'All is quiet on the Western Front'!

Tony Bliar is far too busy sunning himself on yet another freebie holiday to be remotely interested in what is happening anywhere else in the World!

Silence is Golden & thankfully, for the moment, he & his wide mouthed wife are keeping their gobs firmly shut!!!!!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

[anotheoldgit]

Ironic choice of words jno 'A millstone around their necks for decades' Better than a rope around their necks for a few seconds.

Britain and USA partially responsible for WW2 did you experience WW2 whiffey, if not you must have at least heard of a chap called Hitler? who had already started a war before we got involved.

[anotheoldgit]

"We advocate an end to the death penalty worldwide, regardless of the individual or the crime. Margaret Beckett.

This of course does not include the thousands of civilians, and hundreds of troops that have already had a death sentence carried out on them, in Iraq & Afghanistan. What was their crime?

[jno]

my choice of words was deliberate, AOG. And the civilians killed haven't had death sentences, any more than people run over by a bus have had death sentences. Beckett also chose her words deliberately.

[Dom Tuk]

JNO How can you equate being run over by a bus, which is clearly an accident (unless it was a murder) with a directive from a senior officer to his pilots to load their fighter planes with 500 tonnes of bombs and to direct them to a street in baghdad where some informer has said that saddam was dining. The bombs were dropped (well guided they say) from 32000 feet and created a crater about 70 feet wide and 50 feet deep and obliterated every shop and restaurant in the crowded street. 88 people died instantly and another 14 died of horrific injuries later. How can you say that?????

[kwicky]

Is dropping a bomb on innocent civilians less horrific than killing a bunch of young men thought to have plotted your downfall. Where does the buck stop? The pilot, the captain back at base giving the order, his commander, chief of the armed services, the coalition commander or Bush and Blair. This is the cop out! Responsibility for war crimes should solely rest on the people at the top.

[jno]

well, I'm trying to be precise here, Dom Tuk. In my view a death sentence is something imposed on an individual by a legitimate authority. To apply the term to those who die in warfare (civilian or not), or to those who are told by doctors they haven't long to live, is a metaphor; it isn't actually true, any more than it is for those who die in accidents. Remember that those die in war also die accidentally - one may live while the one next to him dies; it's just pure chance, same as falling under a bus. I hope that explains what I was trying to say. Apologies for being a while responding to you; I'm abroad.