主播大秀

主播大秀.co.uk

Talk about Newsnight

Latest programme

Iraq: right or wrong?

  • Newsnight
  • 25 Sep 07, 06:53 PM

Tonight on Newsnight, as Jeremy mentioned in his e-mail, we'll bring you a special Newsnight debate from the fringe of the Labour conference.

soldierdark_203.jpgIraq may have barely merited a mention in Gordon Brown's speech yesterday, but there's no doubt that it's still a hugely controversial issue within the Party.

We asked two people - the Labour MP Mike Gapes and Oliver Kamm to make the case for the invasion, and two others - the Labour MP Bob Marshall-Andrews and comedian Mark Steel - to make the case against, and asked delegates to put their points.

We want to know what you think. Tell us here.

Comments  Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 07:31 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • Mrs Mary Hogg wrote:

How dare Gordon Brown give the situation in Iraq and Afghan no more than one line in his speech on Monday.

Those of us with children or other family members in the forces who have to work out there deserve better.

Something must be done to sort out the ridiculous expectations of what the military can achieve and end the situation. Bring them home!

  • 2.
  • At 07:54 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • Andy wrote:

I'd like to know what the Labour party thinks about the booming industry for mercenaries acting within Iraq - they have immunity from prosecution for crimes against humanity and show accordance to ordinary military laws and procedures.

The Iraqi government has said that the weekend before last Blackwater mercenaries were responsible for murdering 11 civilians.

Video footage of this incident is reported to exist, and last year video footage emerged of Aegis mercenaries randomly shooting at cars and killing people.

The US government has made sure that US civilians cannot be charged for war crimes or crimes against humanity within Iraq - as their junior partner, will our government be putting pressure on its master to ensure that those responsible are brought to justice?

HEY GENERAL!

When "King Dubya" (of the World) strode up to the UN Secretary General bellowing the words: "Hey General - how ya doin" I knew it was all going to be alright. And as I watched the animated foreign policy expert, David Miliband, morph into Mr Bean before my eyes, while confessing New Labour's sins, I wept for joy.

HEY GENERAL!

When "King Dubya" (of the World) strode up to the UN Secretary General bellowing the words: "Hey General - how ya doin" I knew it was all going to be alright. And as I watched the animated foreign policy expert, David Miliband, morph into Mr Bean before my eyes, while confessing New Labour's sins, I wept for joy.

  • 5.
  • At 11:16 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • John McGinty wrote:

ohh- it's all kicking off! That's the closest I've seen to a fight on the 主播大秀 for quite a while...ding ding!

  • 6.
  • At 11:23 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • John McGinty wrote:

ohh- it's all kicking off! That's the closest I've seen to a fight on the 主播大秀 for quite a while...ding ding!

  • 7.
  • At 11:34 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • John McGinty wrote:

ohh- it's all kicking off! That's the closest I've seen to a fight on the 主播大秀 for quite a while...ding ding!

  • 8.
  • At 11:44 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • Alex wrote:

One of the audience mentioned the need for a post-war plan. What about a pre-war plan?
If the UK and the US had given any consideration to the consequences of ousting Saddam and bringing war to Iraq, they would have thought twice about invading.
As it is, the only considerations were power and oil.

On a positive note, I thought that debate was a brilliant idea and was great to watch. Like a more down to earth Question Time and I would love to see that happen more often on all kinds of issues.

HEY GENERAL!

When "King Dubya" (of the World) strode up to the UN Secretary General bellowing the words: "Hey General - how ya doin" I knew it was all going to be alright. And as I watched the animated foreign policy expert, David Miliband, morph into Mr Bean before my eyes, while confessing New Labour's sins, I wept for joy.

  • 10.
  • At 11:46 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • Mark Preston wrote:

Mark Steele hit the nail squarely on the head tonight in the debate when he mentioned - even though he got the name slightly wrong - the Project for a New American Century. I also read that document before it began to be "hidden" and "amended" to make it slightly less obnoxious and he was spot on. It does indeed describe exactly what we see in Iraq today, but it describes it as an "optimum plan" and uses precisely those words to do so.

What we are seeing is what was wanted in the first place. A simple American seizure of sufficient oil assets to assure American fuel independence so that they may easily ignore both global climate change pressures and fragility in international oil prices. With such freedom, the intent in the PNAC was to invest heavily in space development of simpler reusable launch vehicles and manned vessels to permit the establishment of American orbital forces and surveillance. Watch this space...

  • 11.
  • At 11:48 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • JK wrote:

If the UK $ US governments are worried about the democracy and well being of other countries citizens; why don't they invade south Korea, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia... where the Government is worser than Sadam's regime.In the case of Ethiopia, USA is funding them.

  • 12.
  • At 11:52 PM on 25 Sep 2007,
  • Mark Preston wrote:

Mark Steele hit the nail squarely on the head tonight in the debate when he mentioned - even though he got the name slightly wrong - the Project for a New American Century. I also read that document before it began to be "hidden" and "amended" to make it slightly less obnoxious and he was spot on. It does indeed describe exactly what we see in Iraq today, but it describes it as an "optimum plan" and uses precisely those words to do so.

What we are seeing is what was wanted in the first place. A simple American seizure of sufficient oil assets to assure American fuel independence so that they may easily ignore both global climate change pressures and fragility in international oil prices. With such freedom, the intent in the PNAC was to invest heavily in space development of simpler reusable launch vehicles and manned vessels to permit the establishment of American orbital forces and surveillance. Watch this space...

  • 13.
  • At 12:03 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

HEY GENERAL!

When "King Dubya" (of the World) strode up to the UN Secretary General bellowing the words: "Hey General - how ya doin" I knew it was all going to be alright. And as I watched the animated foreign policy expert, David Miliband, morph into Mr Bean before my eyes, while confessing New Labour's sins, I wept for joy.

  • 14.
  • At 12:25 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

I can't let the comment about Greenspan go unchallenged. I quote from this week's Economist (I give the link but it's subscription only unfortunately):

"The Washington Post got the scoop: it declared one of its crack team of readers to be the first to reach page 463, where Mr Greenspan says that the Iraq war was 鈥渓argely about oil鈥濃攁 remark that subsequently 鈥減roved controversial鈥, the newspaper noted. But the words were taken out of context. Mr Greenspan was not talking about an intended oil grab, but only meant to say that Iraq matters as much as it does because of where it is."

As usual the loudest voice in the room (here's looking at you Mark Steele) wins the argument.

  • 15.
  • At 01:42 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • the cookie ducker wrote:

Mark Steel is your typical left wing nat who generally makes me puke; Billy Bragg with jokes as i generally see him, but tonight he articulated what some of us already know, the Iraq war was for oil and business for the very few at the top of the US corporate/industrialist world and i found myself agreeing with him for the very first time on anything.

I almost forgot the Blair clone that is Miliband is the foreign secretary. Was Dave Miliband showing signs of not knowing what day it was when questioned by Jeremy? me thinks he looked a little lost at times, a bit like the time i invited my office cleaner to a blue sky session and general meeting with projections of graphs and coloured markers.(no disrespect to cleaners)
I want more for my tax money and i ain't getting it with these 'making it up as you go along' types, it was bad enough having to listen to Jack Straw yesterday on newsnight and then listen to Miliband speed talk and avoid reasonable questions tonight, and its frightening to think Miliband was a consideration for the recent labour leadership contest from some Labour MPs; frightening to think these people actually weild power, Jeremy rattled Milband tonight....good

P.S: I do not have an office nor a cleaner, illustrative purposes only.

  • 16.
  • At 02:29 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • Adrienne wrote:

Why don't we hear more from Germany, France and Italy (etc) re Iraq?

Could it be that they have a better sense of perspective as to what their duties are to their own people?

Whose interests are we serving in the Middle East? We deploy about 5% or our regular army there and yet it's the focus of our foreign policy (even more so than Afghanistan where we deploy nearly twice the number of troops and the population isn't clear what we are doing there either). Note that both of these countries border Iran (East and West) and our presence there irritates the CIS, China and other nations.

In terms of numbers, surely, the UK is conventionally militarily insignificant?

If one looks more closely, this does seem to be all about Israel. Sadly, the reason for that would appear to be that most people in the UK don't care about their own country, so the few who do care about anything (largely about their second home i.e Israel, mind you), have the loudest voices. That's democracy, and they're just doing what democracy prescribes (which is legitimate and sensible).

In our democracy, it's the first (and the most ambitious) past the post after all.

  • 17.
  • At 04:07 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

Why are we still having this debate about The United States reasons for war?
They never denied they wanted us all to be like them and that is why.
They made that clear when Clinton was in power. They make it clear every time they speak. We dont need to proove it.
They want oil and they want a world where we are like them. Homogenised is a word I learnt in the early 1990's at A-level and thought it was milk!!
Let's face it, in time we will all be like them. Even Iran will be.
Not because of bombs or wars but because people like nice things like phones and blogs and kettles and food.
I see the war in the middle east as the last ditch stand of the religious fanatics against capitilism.
We in the west are like the spolit kids of capitalism complaining while we eat and blog but we dont supply the oil to generate it do we.
Green energy????
Most people in this country are obese so who is going to cycle to watch tele or climb on the roof to install solar?
I am not interested in what happens in the middle east as it puts up a last stand before lying down with it's laptop and big bag of munchies.
I am wondering which country in the west will first otherthrow capitalism.
Don't blame Bush, he told us all he wanted to spread his American way. They even got him in again to do it.
Remember Macdonalds in Russia!!!
Capitalism will trounce every nation for at least this century.

  • 18.
  • At 09:19 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • Brian Kelly wrote:

Newsnights discussion on Iraq was justified & well refereed by JP... Why though do we have to discuss such an important issue courtesy of 主播大秀?... Parliament should be having this debate.
Again..Well done Newsnight & JP.

  • 19.
  • At 10:16 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • Mike Hack wrote:

The invasion of Iraq has been a total disaster and should be debated at every opportunity. Cleverly Brown has somehow divorced himself and his present cabinet from the actions of the Blair regime. New labour has sacrificed too many of our armed forces in this pointless illegal invasion. Perhaps we should remember this when the time comes to cast our vote.

  • 20.
  • At 11:31 AM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • Alan Miller wrote:

The Iraq invasion was the single most disatrous ocurrence of the twentieth century. Its impact will be felt for decades to come and yet those politicians who supported and encouraged this folly are still in power. How come? Are we all completely mad?

  • 21.
  • At 12:28 PM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • Terry wrote:

We went to war to eradicate a stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction which could be deployed against us within 45 minutes. Just wondered if anybody has found these weapons yet. If not ,why are we still in Iraq?

  • 22.
  • At 03:54 PM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

Congratulations 主播大秀 "Newsnight" for opening up this debate, but what a pity that despite Mark Steele & Bob Marshall Andrews no mention made that ever since the 1st Gulf War that part of the planet that was the Gardens of Babylon and birthplace of the Tora patriach "i'brahim" is now littered with depleted uranium which will continue to kill and disfigure thousands for thousands of years. We are all part of this dna experiment and involved in this PNAC - it is about the "21" the "New Millenium" - the 2 & the 1 make 3 for all you out there as yet not members of "Skull & Bones" - the familiar symbol to the Treblinka Kids & a "New World" reference circa Hitler 1923. This Cainaist involvement is the purging force needed to maintain the purity of the Grand Design visible to all on the back of the Fed's Dollar Bill. "The Reasons We Are In Iraq" was clearly set out online . The disinformation that we all have to be "in it" to "preserve" the oil is yet another media spin along with the "Peak Oil" catastrophe which will allow the ripping up of all the last vestiges of "green" and "peace". It's about MONEY a word the Victorians would have used with enthusiasm more than SEX which we are diverted by as capitalism is expanded as thet did with EMPIRE.. but now the particular hedgemony enjoyed by the conquistadors of the Ancient Rite is threatened by the Oriental Order, and as the "crusaders" of the 101st Airborne rushed to the Bank of Baghdad to grab back the EURO's that Saddam had last insisted on being paid by the U.N. for his "Humanitarian Aid for Oil"... the vault was bare. Q. Now why would "we" want to invade Iran? A.Iran is planning to stop using the U.S. dollar to price oil - with less than half of its oil income now paid in the U.S. currency, Iran's central bank governor said: "That's the plan for the future, we are working on that" - Governor Ebrahim Sheibany quoted on by Mirna Sleiman a reporter for Dow Jones Newservice. (how's that! for a bitter of a mute nuke)

  • 23.
  • At 04:09 PM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

i am having trouble sending to you with my comment so will send to "today" and hope that they can burst through your log jam..

meanwhile yes to Mark Preston about Mark Steele & about pnac but there's more to it than that (hence my "other than oil" email it's about the MONEY stupid)
yes to Alex "brilliant" & more of the same
& yes to Chris G.D.Tipper - lets hope my email gets on to this site

njmcGerr,edington,somerset

  • 24.
  • At 08:09 PM on 26 Sep 2007,
  • Bedd Gelert wrote:

Well done for the Iraq debate.

When other networks are hoovering up airtime on Madeleine and Mourinho [and no, I'm not above tuning in for the latest on those sagas occasionally] it is good that someone is devoting their coverage to this very important issue.

  • 25.
  • At 02:28 AM on 27 Sep 2007,
  • Alex Yip wrote:

I was riveted by your debate the other night about Iraq most notably by the speech by Biob Marshall-Andrews who I thought summed up the case so powerfully and succinctly. How true it is that there is no substitute for age in acquiring wisdom and gravitas. Our new Foreign Minister has a long way to go. Is there any chance that the 主播大秀 can forward a copy of Bob's case to me? I would greatly appreciate it. One line in Mr Brown's address? Pathetic. And cowardly.

This post is closed to new comments.

The 主播大秀 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites