Skip to comments.Blair - we must work with 'Axis of Evil' states
Posted on 11/14/2006 6:06:55 AM PST by Rutles4Ever
The first cracks in the united front over Iraq between Tony Blair and President Bush appeared last night as the Prime Minister offered Iran and Syria the prospect of dialogue over the future of Iraq and the Middle East.
Mr Blair said there could be a new “partnership” with Iran if it stopped supporting terrorism in Iraq and gave up its nuclear ambitions. Syria and Iran could choose partnership or isolation, he said.
The Prime Minister tried to exploit moves in Washington to rethink strategy on Iraq by holding out the prospect of engagement with two countries once dubbed by President Bush as part of the “axis of evil”. For the first time he also explicitly ruled out military action against Iran.
And, in words clearly directed at Mr Bush as he prepares for his final two years in power, Mr Blair called for the United States to lead a new drive towards peace in the Middle East, including peace in Palestine and the Lebanon, arguing that ultimately it was the only way to defeat al-Qaeda.
Downing Street denied suggestions that Mr Blair was going “cap in hand” to Damascus and Tehran asking for help and insisted that they were being told that they had to make a “strategic choice” between giving up support for terrorism and nuclear ambitions in return for being brought in from the cold.
It added that Mr Blair was repeating the message that he first gave in a speech in Los Angeles in July.
But, with Mr Blair speaking tomorrow to the Iraq Study Group, which is looking at alternative solutions for Iraq including involving its neighbours, his speech to the Lord Mayor’s banquet at Guildhall this evening was different in tone and suggested that he wants to capitalise on the new mood in Washington. Mr Bush has been opposed to talk with Iran.
Mr Blair said that Iran’s “genuine fear” that America sought a military solution was “entirely misplaced”. It did not, he said bluntly.
Mr Bush ducked any direct confrontation with Mr Blair, saying that he had not read the speech. But, in a White House press conference alongside Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, he gave warning against cracks appearing in the united front with which the West has approached Iran.
“I think it’s very important for the world to unite with one common voice to say to the Iranians that, if you choose to continue forward, you’ll be isolated,” Mr Bush said.
Although Robert Gates, the new US Defence Secretary, is also among those who have advocated a more open approach to Iran, Mr Bush said that the regime’s nuclear ambitions were a “threat to world peace” and went on to discuss the prospect of economic sanctions against the regime.
Mr Blair said that the choice for Iran was clear. “They help the Middle East peace process, not hinder it; they stop supporting terrorism in Lebanon or Iraq and they abide by, not flout, their international obligations. In that case, a new partnership is possible. Or, alternatively, they face the consequence of not doing so: isolation.”
The Prime Minister still hopes to persuade the US to engage fully in the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, but frustrated British diplomats in Washington say that the White House shows no real sign of being interested in the subject. Mr Bush yesterday said that he had discussed with Mr Olmert the two-state solution and the need for the Palestinian government to embrace the principles behind the road map for the Middle East peace process, but made it clear that their talks had focused on Iran and Iraq.
Earlier yesterday, Mr Bush met the Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker, to discuss its imminent report charting a possible new course for Iraq. The President said that he would not “pre-judge” their findings while his spokesman emphasised that, despite Democrat control of Congress, Mr Bush remained commander-in-chief.
Senior Democrats have begun talking openly about the prospect of bringing troops home within six months, while others have urged the president to negotiate a diplomatic solution with Iraq’s neighbours.
But Mr Bush also had harsh words for Syria, a country with which, unlike Iran, the US has diplomatic relations. The President said that Syria should stop interfering in Lebanon and “harbouring extremists” and must begin helping “this young democracy in Iraq succeed”.
Imad Moustapha, the Syrian ambassador to the United States, said that his country was willing to engage with Britain and America.
This is a serious fracture. Blair, no doubt, took his cue from our tragic election that it was safe to jump back in the water of insanity with Bush essentially defeated. I suspect we're going to be hearing the same BS from France, Spain, Germany et al.
At any rate, the confluence of events in the past week, followed by this capitulation, portends a very bloody 2007 for the free world (or what's left of it).
Have President Bush and Blair lost their minds? How do they think 'talking' with Iran and Syria is going to help us? They are THE ENEMY!!!!!
The "if we just give the Palestinians a state the Islamists will chill out" crowd is dangerously delusional.
But it won't. Next.
Actually it is genuine confidence that American is politically incapable of pursuing a military solution. If Iran had any fear in the matter they might actually stop (though it is unlikely). Their pursuit of the means to incinerate millions of their enemies is not the result of any fear, but pure ambition and desire to see human beings cooked, wholesale.
<< Blair - we must work with Axis of Evil states >>
Go to Hell, Blair! And take that damned horse with you.
(You Neo-Axis-co-founding bolshy bastard!)
This is a mistake. A very big mistake.
Fine. But don't expect us to bail you out when things go wrong.
What's truly sad is that these developments are going to lead a lot of conservatives (like myself) to just throw up their hands, shut the doors, bar the windows, and let Europe deal with their coming nuclear holocaust/Islamic caliphate. We sent our young men and women over there to shed their blood for freedom's sak,e and this is what we get?
Here's another take on exactly the same speech:
I know it's oodles of fun to jump and down about them "dern foreigners" but hysteria is neither practical nor useful.
Good luck with that, because, like, Iran and North Korea are such reasonable countries...
Why is that sad? Nations rise and fall due to their own actions. Europe has chosen the path of slow suicide, and is unrepentently marching down it. I can't shed a tear for a culture that won't fight or f@%* to save itself. If they want to sit back and sneer at us in snotty superiority while their own gates are being beaten down, so be it.
For what it's worth, this is one of them "dern foreign" newspapers reporting on the "not softening" of the policy to remove the deterrant of military action from the diplomatic equation.
For the past two years, the White House has stated clearly that "all options" are on the table with regard to Iran. If this doesn't undercut the White House, I don't know what does. Iran "living up to their obligations" means letting the U.N. back in to do their inspections. Whoop dee doo. That carries all the weight of a feather in a hurricane.
I would hasten to point out that Blair didn't say that military options were off the table. He said isolation was the first consequence.
It's sad because the U.K. is a great friend of the United States, and as much as conservatives in the U.K. are disappointed over our elections, I, as a conservative, am disappointed that the British government thinks the light at the end of the tunnel isn't a speeding train. It's not about "fereigners" or what-have-you. If Britain won't stand with us, then there's simply nothing we can do to help stem the tide. It's not a statement of emotion, it's a statement of the cold truth. We can't do this WOT alone. It's impossible.
Blair said this or was it BJ Clinton?
Then I stand corrected. What's the general atmosphere in London? Would a detente with Iran and Syria have any legs with the population there?
'Then I stand corrected. What's the general atmosphere in London? Would a detente with Iran and Syria have any legs with the population there?'
In Britain there is always the instinct to talk to ones enemies before trying to kill them, if only to confirm that the deicision to kill them is the correct one.
To quote Churchil, "Jaw, jaw not war, war."
L Ingraham is playing Blair's actual words. It is not a break or fracture. It is not different at all. IF and WHEN they shape up, is his clear message.
People really need to read or hear more than just some newspaper headline.
good grief..flashing lights on drudge, every talk shjow is reporting this wrongly.
I should clarify and say that I don't mean to include the UK in my condemnation of Europe. I think they're a little wobbly at the minute, but overall the Brits are great friends, and I think they'll pull their act together once they see the rest of Europe start to slide under.
The UK needs to decide if they are our ally, or part of the axis of weasels.
Some might say that the brits were never a true friend of America, but were able to convince people they were when it suited them.
<< What's truly sad is that these developments are going to lead a lot of conservatives (like myself) to just throw up their hands, shut the doors, bar the windows, and let Europe deal with their coming nuclear holocaust/Islamic caliphate.
(States) .... rise and fall due to their own actions. Europe has chosen the path of slow suicide, and is unrepentently marching down it. I can't shed a tear for a culture that won't fight or f@%* to save itself. If (Europeans) want to sit back and sneer at us in snotty superiority while their own gates are being beaten down, so be it. >>
I watched Blair make those remarks and stand by Philip Wester's and Tom Baldwin's in the Times piece that heads this thread. Any Europeon's claim to the contrary is yet another example of their tendency to "sneer at us in snotty superiority while their own gates are being beaten down!"
All of a sudden, a few out of context comments and people are saying we;re no longer your friends. Grow up people, Blair has sacrificed his political career and legacy for you and to fight this war. Why? Because he likes George Bush? He does, but that has nothing to do with it. He BELIEVES in this struggle. So everytime you attack him, it would do you well to read what he said instead of jumping to stupid conclusions.
Also, a major distortion on the part of the British media falsely claiming he 'ruled out action' against iran which is one of the most disgraceful distortions I have every heard in my life. If we need to take out their nuclear facilities, if we don't join in militarily, Blair will still stand sholder to sholder with the Israel or America should they take action, which hopefully they will.
Blair also said that Iran must choose a path. What we may be seeing is the last olive branch offered to Iran to get them to stop developing nukes. The problem of course is where do we go from here. Iran wants war. Hitler wanted war. They may be trying to offer a rain of sunshine to those who could rise up and control the Mahdi Wannabe in Tehran. Either that or they have quite literally lost their minds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.