[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Can you believe it's been 20 years since the Iraq war, what on earth was Blair thinking... he was far too close with Bush who he let push him around. This is all people remember now , when they think of Blair... unfortunate but true.

He and any other Labour leader or Con one were going to support Bush.
Bush jnr was determined to finish the job his Father started re Hussain.
No way would a British government not have supported him in that.

Blair was easily hauled into it, he'd only been PM for 4 years when 9/11 happened .
So he went along with Bush all the way.
While fearing without Con support in parliament he could have been beaten by MPs of his own party voting against getting involved in a new Iraq conflict

You are right though, he is only remembered for the Iraq war.
He did some good social changes especially for the sick and disabled and pensioners.
The NHS too.
Nowhere near enough however for the 2 massive majorities he got in 1997 and 2001.

I was too young to vote during Blair's premiership but I wouldn't have voted for him myself.
I actually preferred Gordon Brown to Blair but Brown got the leadership too late.

Then again, I couldn't bring myself to vote for Cameron's Cons in 2010 due to his NHS stance, I didn't trust him on that, I wavered and ended up voting Lib Dem.
Hoping for a good coalition.
I was greatly disappointed by that barely months afterwards.

It seems at times since Thatcher with the Falklands in the 80s.
That PMs seem to think being in a conflict can maybe help electorally.
I find that utter madness more like.