Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
He's getting a bit embarrassing, no?
(To be honest I'd rather have Hague going round the world, he's a massive prick and certainly one kind of idiot, but he's not a complete amateur).
I don't know, I'm not convinced all of these are really much in the way of gaffes. I think dissatisfaction from his own back benchers and old school Tories is meaning he doesn't have the press on his side the way a Tory PM generally does and so he's suffering a bit.
I'd rather we concentrated on the disturbing Big Society crap his Govt. is pushing rather than a few borderline dodge comments being made. The one about Gaza or whatever was probably true anyway.
but he does seem to be doing a world tour of burbling idiocy.
If in what you're saying, you piss off both potentially dangerous nations and allies in wars that you're fighting, then you're really not doing yourself any favours, particularly when you're already stretched militarily.
He seems to have forgotten the art of thinking before speaking.
has told me that they cannot wait to join the EU and get the fuck out
my experience seems to paint a picture of a big generation gap in Turkey between to stuffy old (male) decision makers and a cosmopolitan thinking middle class youth that feels totally held back
Kinda surprising given that public speaking and all that is supposed to be one of his strengths.
It also bothers me that the word 'mis-speak' is creaping into the UK... Dave should either just man up and say he was wrong on Iran if that's the case.
but he's managed it on every trip so far.
Let Hague handle the world tour, he seems to handle himself with real diplomatic weight.
(at the end)
Stop embarrassing us, Davey!
pissing off Wychwood AND Barry in one muttered sentence. Classy.
That's basic history that any 10 year old should know, let alone the PM. I think he's still behaving like the leader of the opposition rather than the leader of the country - making headlines with what you say is good for one, and bad for the other. Sort it out HTD
In 1944 we were the junior partner. In 1940 we weren't, but what's dates between friends?
But even if he got the dates wrong, you NEVER EVER use the term 'junior partner' when discussing the war effort, regardless of whether you believe it to be true or not - you just don't say that. I'm hardly Mr Military Deference, but if I was a veteran and heard him say that I wouldn't be impressed. Particularly when it's just part of a transparent effort to ingratiate yourself to another country's media
I knew he was reptilloid alien prick but amazingly he managed to out do his own cunt levels with that one. no matter what the war was perceived as at home you don't sully the nature
of the veterans: see The Veitnam War in the states.
Seems a bit of a foreshadowing don't it?
that was stupid....because ...it achieves absolutely nothing.....it didnt even ingratiate himself with india cos they see it as a shallow platitude designed to just score brownie points in India....it does not gain much....yet it looses much in Pakistan......it shows niavity......it puts pro western pakistanis in a more difficult position with regard to internal politics in pakistan, he is niave, but he doesnt care, cos he feels he can wear it as naive honest innocense (maybe to some tory supporters..yes.......but they dont need winning over)
I hate the way that people dismiss people in other countries......as if people in Pakistan dont matter or something.....as if they dont have their own politics and difficult situations.....people seem to dismiss it as just a 'muslim nation' which half supports anti western stuff.......ffs its a country full of a mixture of people, with a full range of nice to nasty and sensible to loonie, and has its own politicians who struggle hard with trying to balance and debate snesibly, some of them try to engage more extreme factions with debate and discussions.......this sort of thing puts back the attempts by moderates to discuss resolutions rather than 'battle militancy'
mtf cameron and act like a world leader, take responsibility for what you say and the fall out that it causes and stop acting like an innocent little child
Cameron's quote on Pakistan was, "We cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that [Pakistan] is allowed to look both ways and is able, in any way, to promote the export of terror, whether to India or whether to Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world."
Please explain how that is dismissing Pakistan as just a Muslim nation.
and there is plenty of people who do that.....my mum for instance, and many other daily mail readers.
It IS all tied up because many people (mild non thinking tories) take what cameron said and here the word pakistan and 'export of terror' and make an association......you know people do that.........also you know that people who dont want to listen to moderates in pakistan will als ojust hear the words 'pakistan exporting terror to afghanistan and india' ....you know that.......you also know that the fact that he said such a thing in india will be taken by people in pakistan who dont want to be moderate to mean that he is making an overture to india, implying pakistan was somehow worse.......
Yes you can come back at me and say that he didnt actually say that......but you and I can be detached and rational about this, but you know that when things are more heated nd you are dealing in involved biased politicas and emotions that it will not be analysed for the actualitee.................
A politician is meant to be a diplomat and diplomats cannot say......'but i didnt ACTUALLY say that'...................diplomats have to take care HOW their message is recieved by MANY different sorts of groups.......especially where the stakes nad tensions are high..........a diplomat has to be aware of how other groups.....hot headed groups .....predjudiced groups with whom you are struggling will take messages............yes it is difficult.........its always ben a problem for western democracies.....how do you balance domestic politics with international ones........perhaps we should have two premiers.......a domestic one (who maybe also deals with like nations (the eu?) and an international/foreign relations one) ....this could work.......in fact if they arnt exactly on the same page this would be good....because then the dichotomy and the conflict between our different interests would be apparent which is a good thing because this problem also besets other coutries and this would allow us to be more honest and allow for others to understand why we can or cant do something easily
you need to convince people in pakistan that he gives pakistan and its people the respect they feel they are due, their country is embroiled with tension and the possibiloity of severe internal violence and strife.
One of the pakistan gov must be that they want to keep the administration there safe, they probably are actually worried that 'the troubles' in pakistan might worsen and there could be a violent struggle for control of the country in the future ((or it is something to actually worry about avoiding)
David Cameron does not actually have those exact worries, so I feel that it is rather cheap of him just to lob niave comments to the media.
For the first time, probably since Maggie, we've got a PM who's willing to say what he genuinely believes, regardless of the criticism he faces from softy "please don't upset other people" advisers.
Well guess what guys? Dave doesn't fuck around. A chair is a chair with him, and if you're not playing to the same tune as the rest of the world when it comes to terrorism prevention and nuclear regulation, he's gonna call you up on it.
I finally know how it feels to have a government in charge that I like. It feels good.
go at it hammer and tongs......fuck diplomacy and discussion......let the mightyest win.....jesus man....there are women and children and old people in pakistan towns and villages nad cities that will suffer cos of that sort of attitude....still its somewhere else aint it wrighty?
Unless it's in Kashmir. Or Cyprus.
it's fine to behave like that when you've got the authority to do so. Lord Palmerston could get away with it in the 19th century, because we were by far the most powerful nation in the world and quite frankly even if someone was going to mess with us, we could easily outgun them.
In comparison, our military is already overstretched, we're no longer an economic powerhouse, and our standing in the world isn't high enough that we can afford to call a spade a spade (if indeed that's what it is and we're not lying... sorry 'misspeaking').
It's our own government that's been telling us that we're no longer the nation we once were, so our Prime Minister needs to accept that and behave in an appropriate manner.
More Gumboot diplomacy under Dave these days.
if not, do you mind if I use it at a dinner party tonight?
And yes - feel free to use it as much as you like :)
Do you genuinely believe an actual war would kick off over frank, truthful comments like the one he made about Gaza?
Since the situation with Israel and Palestine has deteriorated, we're all used to the Labour government sitting on the fence and not having the guts to say anything whatsoever. Same with Obama.
Now that a leader has finally emerged with the strength to speak up for the thousands suffering at the hands of the unimpeachable Israel, the left thinks he should shut up and mind his own business. You can't really please you lot can you?
The difference with Dave is, no-one expected him to ever step out of the Israel line. He has done. Barack 'all talk - no results' Obama on the other hand, promised big things. I'm still waiting.
What I said was back then, if someone stepped out of line, we could use our power to get them back into line. We can't do that now, thus we have to be more nuanced diplomatically.
"our military is already overstretched, we're no longer an economic powerhouse, and our standing in the world isn't high enough that we can afford to call a spade a spade"
"we could easily outgun them"
Question: do you agree or disagree with the comments made about Gaza?
It doesn't take a genius to know that what you say from a position of strength is taken much more seriously by people than what you say from a position of relative weakness.
Annoying people is fine if they're scared of you or reliant on your economic power (as was the case with Palmerston), but as things stand we need some of these countries much more than they need us.
he's either playing to whatever audience he's currently trying to woo, a la his entire political philosophy (bitching about Pakistan in India, no way). Or he's being an inept spastic
if he was actually saying it to the audience he's denigrating. I guess it's in the eye of the beholder but what I see instead is shameless pandering to whoever he's currently in front of at that moment in time.
Do you think he's going to use the phrase 'junior war partner' when he gets back to Britain? Is he going to criticize Pakistan IN Pakistan rather than in front of the leadership of their biggest enemy? I doubt it
“I’m the kind of guy who calls a chair a chair” - points at stool - “This is a chair.” Until someone points out that it’s actually a stool, and a spokesman issues a statement saying that “The Prime Minister was referring to chairs in general.”
...ew wrightlew loves David. Total joker. It worries me that people can't see through Cameron. The most insincere and empty man in history.
Cameron is much emptier than Blair ever was. I genuinely think Blair believed in what he said no matter how wide of the mark he was. Cameron is just trying to please whichever persons he's speaking to.
He's wasting his time today patching up a relationship that we need to work if we're going to do what we set out to in Afghanistan. Strikes me that this 'backbone' thing can do more harm than good at times.
the one about Pakistan may have some basis in fact but you express it behind closed doors to Pakistan itself rather than in a press conference with the leadership of it's biggest enemy, and the Gaza one - although I'm sympathetic to that one - the same standard has to apply
How long has he been prime minister? Not long
When was his meeting with Pakistan scheduled? AFTER his Indian trip
How did they react, and how many scheduled meetings were cancelled after he said it? Not well, lots
I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say they hadn't yet heard it from Straight Talkin' Dave himself
if he had, I'm guessing his comments wouldn't have resulted in a "rift between the two countries that resulted in Pakistani intelligence and security officials cancelling crucial talks with their opposite numbers in MI6 and MI5 on terrorism issues in protest at Mr Cameron’s remarks."
Hmmm, interesting. And don't tell me you don't trust the source: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/concoughlin/100049928/is-david-cameron-becoming-the-new-george-w-bush-with-his-foreign-policy-gaffes/
.......for all my posting faults I dont try to throw my weight around and try to silence others by mentioning the experiance and the understanding that I have about monetry mechanisms.....i dont try to say that I know more than others cos of x y or z......I had a long interchange the other day with whitelightwhitecity, but i chose not to say that I have had much experiance with fx or projects involving stupid amounts of dosh.....because that just cows people into not expressing what they think (I prefer to bludgeon them into not caring by using my posting stamina ;) )
THEN TORN IT TO SHREDS.
just imagin how much internzational strrife he could cause if we let him loose in the UN....he'd stand up.....lob his normal grenades (acompanied by a 'hmm interesting') sit down again and then watch with satisfaction as countries representative start bickering and end up having 'diplomatic incidents' culminating in declarations of wars
Be Nigel Farage.
It completes me ;)
John Prescott had come out with some of this garbage? Imagine the fun Hislop would have had on HIGNFY.
they'd just say....."oh well yeah but, you know its John Prescot, you know what hes like" (a bit like Boris Johnson in the way that people tend to regard them both as sorts of jokes)
... a new series of HIGNFY and The Thick Of It. Can't bleeding wait to see what they make of all this.
that out of them the one that seemed to be most competant in their jobs...or the one that had the most skillz for their job was douglas Hurd being foreign secretary.....he seemed to take his job somewhat seriously (compared with the rest of the shower)
Who I actually quite like.
there really is no messing around with him. When he says something that people might not like you get the impression he really doesn't care who does and doesn't agree with him unlike David 'PR Opportunity' Cameron.
totally get it.....i always thought there was something so similar about how unatural they both looked when they made their media appearences when so young