President Blair anyone?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6857807.ece

The appointment of Mr Blair to Europe's top post would mark an extraordinary return to frontline politics for the former British Prime Minister

Yeah, why not

gives us a British input on things

Or he may send the whole of europe into war on a whim….

God's own president on earth as ruler of Europe. Lovely.

If both Ernie and I can agree on our hatred of the man, I think you can see that he's not an ideal individual. I think that Ernie and I would, however, argue over who got the first shot.

Oh please no. 👿

All the serious points aside, just how much would it annoy Gordon Brown to be once again 2nd fiddle to Tony Blair?

President of Europe or Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, which do you reckon pulls the ladies more?

😉

I don't understand the politics behind who will eventually end up with this if the office comes into being.

While Blair is tainted by some of what he did in office, he remains engaging, an excellent communicator and quite an impressive figure internationally. Of the people realistically suited for the job, he is probably the best.

As with Mandelson's return to British politics, I don't greatly like the guy, but my admiration for what he is capable of is considerable.

I reckon he'll be pope by the end of the next decade.

e remains engaging, an excellent communicator

Isn't it a shame that this is the be-all and end-all though?

first prime minister, then president,… messiah,… god

id be wary of slagging him now in a few years he could be omnipotent

Clarkson for the job I say!

If both Ernie and I can agree on our hatred of the man, I think you can see that he's not an ideal individual

Oh, you two don't like him, oh well, that's that settled then isn't it? 'cuase you two are well known for your moderate and balanced political outlooks aren't you….

Perhaps we could get some of those NATO troops that are fighting for democracy in Afghanistan and bring them back to fight for democracy in Europe?

Could you imagine the furore if Afghanistan had had multiple elections until the pre-determined, "desired" result was achieved ?

Or he may send the whole of europe into war on a whim….

oooh never thought about that – let's give the job to the Germans instead

Very good point, Cranberry. Very good point indeed.

I don't remember voting for this.

EU democracy in action, eh?

wunnerful

Did you vote for the Secretary General of NATO?

Did you vote for the Secretary General of the United Nations?

Possibly you are outraged about that as well, I don't know. 🙂

gives us a British input on things

Don't you mean more input for the Yanks ?

Interestingly enough, it appears to be conservative heads of state which are backing Blair as president, I can't imagine why.

just how much would it annoy Gordon Brown to be once again 2nd fiddle to Tony Blair?

Won't Gordon Brown have resigned, and be working for the World Bank/IMF/whatever, and saving the world by then ?

he remains engaging, an excellent communicator

And yet, despite following politics fairly closely, I still don't have a clue what the man believes in – apart from himself of course. He didn't use his great 'communicating skills' to that effect – soundbites and meaningless waffle maybe.

Still to be fair to him, he probably hasn't got a clue in what he believes in – the guy is an idealogical airhead, that's why he left all policies decisions to Gordon Brown.

As with Mandelson's return to British politics, I don't greatly like the guy, but my admiration for what he is capable of is considerable.

The comparison to Mandelson is that they both pulled out of national politics totally discredited. And now like Mandelson, Blair hopes to make a comeback by avoiding elections and taking up an unelected post.

I agree on both counts ernie. Both Blair and Mandelson are splendid political operators, as long as the goal of politics is the retention of power through the retention of popularity, rather than the attainment of power to effect change according to convictions. 🙂

Should be better at the treaty on this, but the president is a figurehead role to a substantial extent is it not? Blair does consensus building like few other people unless dealt an impossible hand, and is superb at glad-handing his way around the world making people think he's amazing. I'm reasonably confident those are key parts of the president's job description. 8)

Not a chance. Too much dislike of him across the EU

The Economist is not writing him off Jeremy, and Prospect's Brussels diarist reckons he will probably get it. This is less about whether he is a great guy starting from first principles, or whether he is the best of a bunch of people most of whom lack Blair's profile outside Europe.

I thought we'd seen and heard the last of that horrid little man.

Does this mean I'll have to avoid Radio 4 for the next 5 years again?

but the president is a figurehead role to a substantial extent is it not?

Indeed, so why would Blair be interested in the job then, that's the intriguing question. Clearly the man has always been hungry for power, and a position without power should have no interest for him.

This was amply illustrated when he resigned as Labour leader. Now former leaders tend to return to the backbenches (think of former leaders) but not Blair, he simultaneously resigned his parliamentary seat.

Obviously if he wasn't going to call the shots, then he didn't want to play the game. Serving his constituents, country, and party, was not what it was about. He had reached the top, and national politics was of no further personal use to him.

I suspect that at least some of the attraction of President of the EU (apart from his obvious ego) is the similar to the attraction of 'special middle-east peace envoy'. I have no doubt that lurking somewhere in the back of his mind is the "what if" thought.

What if, one day there was an attempt to have him arrested for violating international law and having been responsible for manufacturing lies to justify an illegal war. Now I know that many will dismiss that as totally infeasible, but Blair is married to an highly qualified lawyer of international law who knows that it is not totally infeasible. He also knows the mistake that Gen Pinochet made in believing that an international arrest warrant could never be issued. He also knows how preposterous it would be to arrest the existing/former President of the EU and Middle-East peace envoy.

Blair does consensus building like few other people unless dealt an impossible hand

He has been a totally useless 'consensus building' special middle-east peace envoy. Or is that what you meant by "unless dealt an impossible hand" ?

I'm not very convinced by that I must admit. not totally infeasible is probably a fairly accurate description of the risk level. I think his ego is a more plausible reason for wanting the job. (Incidentally, did we do the attempt to arrest Ehud Barak the other day?)

And you're right about the Middle East, he's done nothing. Although you will agree that it seems to be quite a tricky problem. 🙂

There should be an election.

Also the Man who got away with a war on innocents said

"Only God can judge me"

Ignorance at it's best only to send us into another war and only God can judge him again.

Makes me sick.

I'm not very convinced by that I must admit. not totally infeasible is probably a fairly accurate description of the risk level.

As I understand it, under international law it is completely feasible. Infeasibility only comes into it when you look at it from a purely political angle – in which case, it becomes totally infeasible (or is it unfeasible 😕 )

But politics changes (as Pinochet found out) and who's to say that in the future there won't be a government in Britain or elsewhere which is very hostile to what Blair did and doesn't seek an arrest warrant ? I'm not saying that it is in the forefront of his mind, but I'm sure that lurking in the back of his mind exists the "what if" thought.
It is after all, a legal possibility.

So the EU is to have a "President"? How come we don't get a vote on it, then?

If both Ernie and I can agree on our hatred of the man,

Blair would probably be quite happy being equally hated by the extreme right and left.

Blair would probably be quite happy being equally hated by the extreme right and left.

Flashheart isn't extreme right. Possibly slightly to the left of Blair in fact. I'm not sure whether Flashheart could have got on with a neo-con like Bush as well as Blair. If Flashheart was honest, he'd claim to be LibDem imo. I'm definitely far left though 8)

Willie Hague had this about right: classic

If Flashheart was honest, he'd claim to be LibDem imo

Given your frame of reference Ernie I can quite see why you'd think that 😉

PMSL at Hague. He really is good on his feet.

God no.

I'd rather have Boris as EU President.

BigDummy – Member
Did you vote for the Secretary General of NATO?
Did you vote for the Secretary General of the United Nations?
Possibly you are outraged about that as well, I don't know.

No, I didn't get to vote for them either. But why shouldn't we get to vote for them? Too much power in unelected hands and we don't have the right to bear arms.

Too much autocracy, not enough democracy.

Outrage, nah, just value freedom.

he remains engaging, an excellent communicator

So was that hitler chappie and as i recall he wanted to be in charge of europe too….

There is no chance. For sure some folk are bigging him up but he is so hated accross the rest of the EC that there is no chance at all of this happening.

'communicating skills'

His sentences are often entirely free of verbs.

But why shouldn't we get to vote for them?

Probably because you wouldn't have a **** clue who any of them were or what they do.

and we don't have the right to bear arms.

What does that have to do with anything?