Hoon blames Blair; ex-Army Chief supports Iraqi resistance. posted by Richard Seymour

A nice double surprise for the Prime Minister before the polls. Geoff Hoon told the Evening Standard yesterday that Blair was to blame for the chaos and bloodshed in Iraq. Assiduously scrubbing his hands of all that haemoglobular fluid, he reckons he can't be faulted for having supported such a lunatic venture, because it would all have been okay if the occupation had been run slightly differently. Today, even more surprisingly, General Sir Michael Rose - a man who has been called on to support UK military ventures in the newspapers before - has supported the Iraqi resistance. Asked if the resistance were "right" to try to get the American forces out of Iraq, he said:

"Yes I do. As Lord Chatham said, when he was speaking on the British presence in North America, he said 'if I was an American, as I am an Englishman, as long as one Englishman remained on American native soil, I would never, never, never lay down my arms'."

The BBC reports the following remark: "It is the soldiers who have been telling me from the frontline that the war they have been fighting is a hopeless war, that they cannot possibly win it and the sooner we start talking politics and not military solutions, the sooner they will come home and their lives will be preserved."

Now, now. Comparing the Iraqi resistance to American revolutionaries is the sort of thing you can only get away with if you aren't ceaselessly mining Bush's colonic matter. You are a Sir, Michael. That carries responsibilities. You are endowed by the British state, which couldn't be more completely embedded in the yankee yuckhole if it had the stars n stripes permanently embossed on every civil servant's backside, and a Secretary of State for McDonalds. Watch your mouth.

Labels: 'war on terror', blair, elections, iraq, iraqi resistance, warmongers