Realistically, he would be expected to go around 2007. Any later than that and it would be impossible for any new Prime Minister to come in before the following election.
He has been looking increasingly unwell and drawn over the last year or two. This might be a minor procedure, but he simply doesn't look well.
[Edited 2004-10-01 11:02:00]
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
ZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 6930 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 620 times:
He also said that this is a routine surgery and that he will be back in the office on MOnday.
One more term as PM, I don't know if he will make it. He has been looking worse each time I see him
Best of luck to MR. Blair However with this operation.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 600 times:
Hehe true. Perhaps while there in there, they should look for a 'clue' as well. Make no mistake, I was jolly glad in 97 when TB won, it was necessary and desirable. But right now, I'm less impressed. Until he gets out from under the tenacious grip of "business-friendly" politics and addresses fundamental short comings in UK infrastructure (ie nationalises the railways properly and takes back the Tube) and basic services (de-marketising the NHS for instance), I won't vote Labour.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 555 times:
You confuse adherence with reasonableness.
I am no standard bearer for Tony Blair or the Labour Party. However, neither am I a rabid opponent with a virulent hatred of either him or the party.
Saying that Blair is far from heartless is not an endorsement of him, merely a recognition that cartoon-style denunciation is unhelpful at best, and childish at worst.
Both Blair and the government can be criticised over numerous things, the Iraq war just being one. However, I do not subscribe to the view that Blair (or any other Prime Minister of whatever political view) deliberately and mendaciously plotted to take us into a war regardless of circumstance or evidence, purposely deceiving the entire country. He just wouldn't do it - nor would Brown, Howard, Kennedy, Thatcher or any of the previous incumbents. Attack him for being wrong, not with simplistic insults.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks ago) and read 530 times:
Actually, I bet it has "First President of the European Union" engraved on it.
You know, I've always thought that would have a certain delicious irony to it. I mean, the rest of Europe were delighted that they got the most pro-EU PM in years coming to power in 1997. Imagine their reaction if as a result they then had to deal with him actually running the thing.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7791 posts, RR: 23 Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks ago) and read 518 times:
Hope he get's well.
What i find strange is that the fact that Blair has just bought a 3.5 million quid house in the middle of central London. You would have thought he'd buy somewhere peaceful and quiet in the countryside to get away from it all when he calls it a day.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12701 posts, RR: 80 Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 466 times:
It says a lot about the utter decline of the once powerful Tory Party that Blair can make such a statement about his career plans, they managed to come 4th in a by-election, that the main opposition party should have won, or at least come a decent 2nd, at this stage in the Parliament.
If the goverent is so unpopular (clearly the Daily Mail and those who swallow their shit are in a different country to the rest of us, is Blair and goverment liked? No, are they hated, no).
Klaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20845 posts, RR: 55 Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 449 times:
I hope he´ll recover fully. Good luck.
That said, I´m reasonably sure that he didn´t push his country into the war (and by appearing as the indispensable token allyenabled the war) just for the heck of it.
I think it´s actually worse than that.
He set priorities which then prompted him to push his country into the war. We´ll probably have to wait for the last of the inevitable tell-all books to know for sure, but it appears that cuddling up (to not use the adjacent more unappetizing word) to the US administration was one of his primary objectives which made proper scrutiny of the evidence dispensable in his eyes.
Scotty From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 1999, 1875 posts, RR: 3 Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 436 times:
No Klaus. He made the biggest gaffe a PM can ever make. And in my judgement deliberately. He got the House of Commons to approve a war by getting them to vote on a motion which was backed up by lies.
777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 432 times:
I think it´s actually worse than that.
He set priorities which then prompted him to push his country into the war. We´ll probably have to wait for the last of the inevitable tell-all books to know for sure, but it appears that cuddling up (to not use the adjacent more unappetizing word) to the US administration was one of his primary objectives which made proper scrutiny of the evidence dispensable in his eyes.
Nonsense, nothing at all says that Tony Blair went along with George W. Bush merely so Bush would 'still be his friend'. Indeed, if Blair hadn't was pro-war, the war would have likely not happened at all - at least with UK support the US isn't going it completely alone.
I think Blair went to war because he genuinely believed Iraq was a threat. The problem was the things became political, with those in Blair's cabinet having to deal with (as they perceived it) an anti-war media, a huge anti-Bush voice all while trying to ensure that the country was safe. If things were done in an underhand manner (the dodgy dossier...) I believe they were done by others in the government - not Tony Blair.
The problem is that the UK went to war on the premise that Saddam had WMD - that's what Parliament voted on. For that reason, and only that reason, Blair needs to explain himself and the intelligence services.
Scotty From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 1999, 1875 posts, RR: 3 Reply 25, posted (8 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 418 times:
Yes spot on and he needs to stop coming out with stuff like "but Iraq is better off without Saddam". Maybe so, but thats NOT what the Commons voted on.
Right up until Powell blew the cover on WMD Blair was adamant that Iraq had WMD and thats what the intelligence had said
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined exactly 9 years ago today! 
, 6930 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Dec 1999, 1875 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20845 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
