Times: Blair "out on a limb"
LouPaulsen at attbi.com
Thu Feb 27 00:23:47 MST 2003
The anti-war Guardian thinks the labour 'revolt' has materially limited what
Blair can do. But I figured I should look and see what the pro-war Times
thinks ... well, they think so too. They think that if there is no Security
Council war resolution, Blair will have serious problems joining Bush in a
'Even more worrying for Mr Blair were the private warnings from dozens of
Labour MPs who remained loyal yesterday that they would be unable to support
him if he sought to go to war without UN authority. In those circumstances
Mr Blair would probably need Tory MPs’ support to secure Parliament’s
backing for military action.
'Acknowledging that before the debate began, Mr Blair told MPs that he was
working “flat out” to secure the passage of a UN resolution which concludes
that Saddam had failed to take his “final opportunity”.
'But Mr Blair now clearly faces a devastating split in his party if he goes
to war without UN approval. The Times was told authoritatively last night
that by lunchtime yesterday Labour whips had expected 145 MPs to rebel. They
managed to dissuade about 20 of them and believe that the rebel tally would
fall dramatically if a second UN resolution were passed.'
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism