Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ITV)   Cliff Notes of Tony Blair's tl;dr opinion on Iraq: because we didn't jump into Syria, not because the 2003 invasion was a shiat-stained farkup of a mistake   (itv.com) divider line 120
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

1885 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jun 2014 at 9:56 AM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



120 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-15 08:02:39 AM  
Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.
 
2014-06-15 08:12:51 AM  
Benghazi!!!  After all, that's the same thing as those two little wars, give or take a few hundred thousand deaths or so!

Everybody keep thinking about Benghazi.
 
2014-06-15 08:28:33 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


So very much this. Pity he doesn't have the backbone to simply admit that they farked up in a big way ...But no, it's full denial-mode with everyone involved.
 
2014-06-15 09:58:32 AM  

fazookus: Benghazi!!!  After all, that's the same thing as those two little wars, give or take a few hundred thousand deaths or so!

Everybody keep thinking about Benghazi.


There were no British in Benghazi. Go to the corner.
 
2014-06-15 10:01:04 AM  
Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.
 
2014-06-15 10:03:18 AM  
Both things can be true at the same time.

If we were boundlessly committed to the region, we could absolutely spend eternity tamping these things down.

We aren't, though.
 
2014-06-15 10:03:23 AM  

Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.


So......Bush didn't get us involved in Iraq in the first place?
 
2014-06-15 10:04:14 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


Britain in any war nowadays is like that old Looney Tunes cartoon with the big dog and little dog.
"Wait up for me, Spike!"
 
2014-06-15 10:08:36 AM  
Tony Blair is doubling down because he knows he f*ucked up in iraq. What an ego.
 
2014-06-15 10:10:01 AM  
According to the neocons the solution to the failure of intervention is.... more intervention.

The military industrial complex won't be satisfied until the US is so in debt it can't afford to buy another bullet.

And AIPAC won't be happy until the only country Israel borders is India.
 
2014-06-15 10:12:16 AM  

Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.


It's almost like the headline doesn't mention Bush at all.
 
2014-06-15 10:13:00 AM  

Schmerd1948: Tony Blair is doubling down because he knows he f*ucked up in iraq. What an ego.


He is desperate to revise history, since history is showing him no mercy.
 
2014-06-15 10:15:51 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


With hindsight, invasion of Iraq was a bad idea.

Before Paul Bremer dismantled the Iraqi government and army, everyone told him it was a VERY bad idea.
 
2014-06-15 10:16:28 AM  
so basically we now need to support an iranian backed shia run dictatorship (which replaced the sunni dictatorship we overthrew) against the sunni and kurds, who are supported by saudi arabia, qatar, kuwait and turkey respectively. Meanwhile, supporting them would give assistance to the Assad regime, despite the fact we've been arming these same rebels (inadvertantly or not, they have our equipment) against him. BUT if iran doesn't play ball on the nuclear front, we need to also go to war with them, while at the same time supporting their efforts against ISIS.

thanks tony! i'm so very glad you're hear to help us make this brilliant and clear distinctions
 
2014-06-15 10:18:01 AM  
Why are we not invading everything east of the Thames?
 
2014-06-15 10:18:46 AM  
I remember when Iraq war 1 was over, people were upset that we left Saddam in power. Now that seems like the smartest thing we ever did.
 
2014-06-15 10:20:02 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


Because sometimes your ally is an idiot, yet the alliance is more important than integrity.
 
2014-06-15 10:21:07 AM  
Blair and Bush blew everything to shiat and now Tony's mad that peace hasn't suddenly broken out in a region that's been at war for 1000 years?  They destabilized a bad situation and created a shiatstorm with no follow-up plan.
 
2014-06-15 10:22:37 AM  
Something is wrong with the headline but I'm not sure exactly what.  Grammar police help me out
 
2014-06-15 10:24:27 AM  

M11618: It was wrong to destroy Germany after WWI but that doesn't mean it was wrong to fight Germany in WWII.


When ISIS rolls into France I'll support US involvement.
 
2014-06-15 10:26:13 AM  

tlchwi02: so basically we now need to support an iranian backed shia run dictatorship (which replaced the sunni dictatorship we overthrew) against the sunni and kurds, who are supported by saudi arabia, qatar, kuwait and turkey respectively. Meanwhile, supporting them would give assistance to the Assad regime, despite the fact we've been arming these same rebels (inadvertantly or not, they have our equipment) against him. BUT if iran doesn't play ball on the nuclear front, we need to also go to war with them, while at the same time supporting their efforts against ISIS.

thanks tony! i'm so very glad you're hear to help us make this brilliant and clear distinctions


No, I think he means they should have toppled Assad, and then run the country.

I mean, I can't phantom that he means to imply that the west should have backed Assad, thats the exact opposite of what it was threathening to do just 1 year ago.

---

I stopped reading his bullshiat when he started blatantly lying "we did not know Syria had chemical weapons till Syria used them".

Well, sorry, but my memory spans more than 24 months.

farking Wikipedia says Syria has been producing them since the early 80s. Everyone farking knew. They told everyone and refused to sign the farking convention until Russia brokered the deal. WTF., I know English media is not as black/white as US media, how can he get away with just making random stuff up, that is proveable lies?
 
2014-06-15 10:26:26 AM  
"On Iraq, let's ignore those who got it all wrong "

Especially John McCain.  He is really out of it.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/06/13/on-iraq- le ts-ignore-those-who-got-it-all-wrong/
 
2014-06-15 10:26:41 AM  

CruJones: Something is wrong with the headline but I'm not sure exactly what.  Grammar police help me out


You don't need the grammar police, you need the bourbon wagon.
 
2014-06-15 10:27:35 AM  
 
2014-06-15 10:27:55 AM  

Abox: M11618: It was wrong to destroy Germany after WWI but that doesn't mean it was wrong to fight Germany in WWII.

When ISIS rolls into France I'll support US involvement.


Dammit, now I want a bucket of thick sliced fries with a tub of mayo to dip them in.  THANKS OBAMA
 
2014-06-15 10:27:57 AM  

kling_klang_bed: Britain in any war nowadays is like that old Looney Tunes cartoon with the big dog and little dog.
"Wait up for me, Spike!"


Spike's my hero 'cause he's so big and strong!
 
2014-06-15 10:29:17 AM  
This week our enemies are - [roll dice] and our allies are - [roll more dice].
 
2014-06-15 10:30:19 AM  

Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.


By not taken seriously, you of course mean, by you and your moron mailinglist friends. Which in your world constitutes everyone.

---

Who decided to invade Iraq?

Bush.

Who decided to pull the army out of Iraq?

Bush.
 
2014-06-15 10:31:53 AM  

spawn73: farking Wikipedia says Syria has been producing them since the early 80s. Everyone farking knew. They told everyone and refused to sign the farking convention until Russia brokered the deal. WTF., I know English media is not as black/white as US media, how can he get away with just making random stuff up, that is proveable lies?


The BBC is not representative of all English media.  Note, for example, how many highly-editorialized Daily Fail articles get linked right here on Fark.
 
2014-06-15 10:32:00 AM  
FTFA-
Three or four years ago al Qaida in Iraq was a beaten force. The country had massive challenges but had a prospect, at least, of overcoming them. It did not pose a threat to its neighbours. Indeed, since the removal of Saddam, and despite the bloodshed, Iraq had contained its own instability mostly within its own borders.
Though the challenge of terrorism was and is very real, the sectarianism of the Maliki Government snuffed out what was a genuine opportunity to build a cohesive Iraq.



What an absolute load of crap. 10 years later and the idiot still has no understanding of the forces tearing Iraq apart. He blames the sectarianism of the Maliki government. As if the Sunnis and shiates and the Kurds could ever be anything but sectarian. The hubris of this clown thinking if the west just walked in and showed them the errors of their ways they would forget and forswear 1200 years of history.
 
2014-06-15 10:32:03 AM  
The real cause of this is that Sterling slept with the dictator's wife
 
2014-06-15 10:32:23 AM  
Meanwhile the UK (and the US for that matter) had little to no interest in the Second Congo War that killed 5 million people between 1998 and 2008. But it's great he's still trotting out lines of BS to justify Iraq.
 
2014-06-15 10:33:23 AM  

M11618: Abox: M11618: It was wrong to destroy Germany after WWI but that doesn't mean it was wrong to fight Germany in WWII.

When ISIS rolls into France I'll support US involvement.


Isis is every bit as evil as the nazis. Just because they aren't beheading/raping/torturing white people you don't care? That's pretty racist.



It's not that I don't care, it's just not my barometer for where/when we should commit forces.
 
2014-06-15 10:33:41 AM  

spawn73: Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.

By not taken seriously, you of course mean, by you and your moron mailinglist friends. Which in your world constitutes everyone.

---

Who decided to invade Iraq?

Bush.

Who decided to pull the army out of Iraq?

Bush.


So, obviously the correct move is to put the army back into Iraq?
 
2014-06-15 10:33:42 AM  

marksman: Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.

So......Bush didn't get us involved in Iraq in the first place?


I think he believes that its Obamas fault that there isn't any US troops in Iraq.

I've seen that belief echoed as a talking point a lot.


Fact is of course, that it was the Bush administration that signed the deal with the Iraqi government to by out by 2011, and the Iraqi government asked Obama to promise to be bound by this, seeing as the signing took place whilst he was the president elect.

Obama could of course have chosen to violate an agreement USA made with Iraq. But that would quite honestly make USA look even more untrustworthy. And besides, in 2011, those ISIL assholes weren't really a thing.
 
2014-06-15 10:35:15 AM  

M11618:  At the time all the major intelligence agencies said Iraq had WMD,


That's a lie. Please stop lying.
 
2014-06-15 10:37:29 AM  

Rhypskallion: Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.

Because sometimes your ally is an idiot, yet the alliance is more important than integrity.


True.

Denmark went along with this bullshiat as well. And Bush made our PM, Anders Fogh, the NATO general secretary.

So our alliance and friendship is strong, to bad about the Iraqis.
 
2014-06-15 10:37:59 AM  

I_Can't_Believe_it's_not_Boutros: kling_klang_bed: Britain in any war nowadays is like that old Looney Tunes cartoon with the big dog and little dog.
"Wait up for me, Spike!"

Spike's my hero 'cause he's so big and strong!


www.toonzone.net

/spoiler alert: he dies anyway
 
2014-06-15 10:39:03 AM  

Mouser: spawn73: Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.

By not taken seriously, you of course mean, by you and your moron mailinglist friends. Which in your world constitutes everyone.

---

Who decided to invade Iraq?

Bush.

Who decided to pull the army out of Iraq?

Bush.

So, obviously the correct move is to put the army back into Iraq?


You're the one biatching, you tell me what you think the correct and obvious thing is to do.

I sure have my ideas, but I can't be arsed to share them with the likes of you.
 
2014-06-15 10:39:20 AM  

M11618: He's actually correct, you couldn't undue the invasion of Iraq but you could help fight isis in Syria. We didn't, and they spread to Iraq. The Iraqis asked for airstrikes and Obama said no and now Iran has sent 2,000 troops into Iraq. Even if going into Iraq was a mistake not fighting (by which I mean massive airstrikes not boots on the ground) in Syria and the later in Iraq was also a mistake. At the time all the major intelligence agencies said Iraq had WMD, we listened and were wrong (maybe, I think they went to Syria and were used fairly recently) and now all the agencies said Isis was dangerous, we didn't listen and were wrong. Being wrong on Iraq 2003 doesn't mean we were right about Syria, Isis, and Iraq in 2014.


Yeah, massive airstrikes, that's the ticket!  A hundred to one, elderly, women, children to a "terrorist" killed.  Problem solved.  You should volunteer to head up our foreign policy, that is just brilliant!  Take out all their power stations, water supply, transportation systems, bridges, that would take care of Iraq's problems, and Syria's too.  It is so simple, why can't our leaders just start bomb, bomb, bombing away?
 
2014-06-15 10:40:31 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.



The simple answer is that Bush is not a complete doofus.


Your post is an example of cognitive dissonance. You can't resolve the leftish propaganda about Bush being an idiot with your own observation about Bush's leadership and influence.
 
2014-06-15 10:40:34 AM  

anfrind: spawn73: farking Wikipedia says Syria has been producing them since the early 80s. Everyone farking knew. They told everyone and refused to sign the farking convention until Russia brokered the deal. WTF., I know English media is not as black/white as US media, how can he get away with just making random stuff up, that is proveable lies?

The BBC is not representative of all English media.  Note, for example, how many highly-editorialized Daily Fail articles get linked right here on Fark.


But surely BBC will call him on this...
 
2014-06-15 10:40:37 AM  

spawn73: marksman: Mouser: Six years and Subby's still blaming Bush, got it.  And people wonder why Obama supporters aren't taken seriously.

So......Bush didn't get us involved in Iraq in the first place?

I think he believes that its Obamas fault that there isn't any US troops in Iraq.


No, I think it's Obama's fault we didn't withdraw troops as soon as he took office and let nature take its course.

I'm under no illusions that Bush's "nation building" ideas weren't a failure.  His big mistake wasn't getting us into Iraq; it was not getting us out after we had achieved our objective of taking out Saddam.  The fact that Obama did nothing to change course, however, doesn't exactly impress me with either his competence or his commitment to his peacenik supporters.  How's the Nobel prize working out, btw?
 
2014-06-15 10:41:37 AM  

M11618: He's actually correct, you couldn't undue the invasion of Iraq but you could help fight isis in Syria. We didn't, and they spread to Iraq. The Iraqis asked for airstrikes and Obama said no and now Iran has sent 2,000 troops into Iraq. Even if going into Iraq was a mistake not fighting (by which I mean massive airstrikes not boots on the ground) in Syria and the later in Iraq was also a mistake. At the time all the major intelligence agencies said Iraq had WMD, we listened and were wrong (maybe, I think they went to Syria and were used fairly recently) and now all the agencies said Isis was dangerous, we didn't listen and were wrong. Being wrong on Iraq 2003 doesn't mean we were right about Syria, Isis, and Iraq in 2014.


And when are we going to stop fighting?

The war in Iraq was sold as deposing a leader and getting a democratic, pluralistic government in place. We then spent a few billion on training their armed forces to be ready for something more than a few thousand insurgents walking into a city. And now you're saying we need to go back, despite the fact that the government has actually turned out to be corrupt, giving all the juicy jobs to Shia instead of the people who might be capable of running an army?
 
2014-06-15 10:43:23 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


I think "seemingly" is the key word there.  In reality, Blair is as intelligent and trustworthy as a used Lada salesman.
 
2014-06-15 10:45:46 AM  

letrole: Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


The simple answer is that Bush is not a complete doofus.



That's true...I've heard simple people say that.
 
2014-06-15 10:46:20 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


Because he's completing farking insane. "Messianic" doesn't even being to cover it.
 
2014-06-15 10:50:05 AM  

letrole: Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


The simple answer is that Bush is not a complete doofus.


Your post is an example of cognitive dissonance. You can't resolve the leftish propaganda about Bush being an idiot with your own observation about Bush's leadership and influence.


I've heard many republicans state exactly that, that Bush is actually a pretty smart man. Sadly, this view reinforces that which we already know- that republicans are some of the most deluded beings on the planet
 
2014-06-15 10:50:58 AM  

Speaker2Animals
Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.


Two things:
1. Bush is actually really smart. Look up his speeches as governor on YouTube.
2. They didn't go in to Iraq on accident, you're just to dumb to realize that. Or, he's just smarter than you and fooled you in to thinking he's dumb and made a mistake, ill let you pick.
 
2014-06-15 10:51:03 AM  

Bad_Seed: Speaker2Animals: Never understand how someone as seemingly intelligent and well-spoken as Blair got caught up with a complete doofus like Bush.

Because he's completing farking insane. "Messianic" doesn't even being to cover it.


I can't believe the British press didn't go after Blair when he converted after leaving Downing St.  I mean, you no longer think the Queen is defender of your faith, isn't the right to thing to do to resign right away?
 
Displayed 50 of 120 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report