It was bad enough that Tony Blair wholeheartedly voiced his approval of the Sudan and Afghanistan missile strikes, against countries we are not at war with. Has neither the US not the British government learnt from experiences in Libya, Iraq and Serbia that missile strikes have limited effect against "rogue" regimes, let alone shadowy terrorist groupings?
Apart from US investment in Britain, the US has always been cautious about overtly backing Britain, as in the Suez crisis and the Falklands war. It is about time Tony Blair started to learn to act independently and with caution and prudence, and not jump every time the US says to.
While terrorism has to be acted against, is it not better for the government to act discreetly, without making bold pronouncements?
London SE20Reuse content