The record is stuck

I am not a soft-eyed romantic who thinks that there is very much difference between one political party and another. The only differences lie in the areas of the population who give them support and denigrate all others. Running a country requires quite a bit of duck and dive, compromise and occasional dirty tricks.
If you take my attitude on board, you may appreciate how pissed off I am with the current iteration of Prime Minister.
So much of what he was alleged to have said and what he was seen and heard to say sounded so politically naïve that I thought he genuinely did not know which way was up. His Jolly Good Show Chaps performance during the wheeling and dealing that led to the coalition was Billy Bunter after WeightWatchers.
Sadly, he is now revealing himself as little better than the last PM and is well on the way to the examples of the snake-oil seller supremo Blair.
He appeared in Afghanistan yesterday and this effort could well go down as the first time his cloak of invisibility slipped and we saw he had no new clothes. Everything he said was with a motive - to keep the poor bloody infantry on side so they will further declare what an essential and valued job they are doing in the country. Oh - and make sure you write home to Mum and your Doris with the same message; that 77% opposition is a worry when we preach democracy and fair government. He said that the Government will "rewrite and republish" the Military Covenant setting out the country's obligations to its fighting men and women. Just what needs to be re-written? This is just an opening for the team back at the Officers' Mess to introduce their skills of deception and deceit. His next fly was an increase in the overseas allowance - back dated no less. Contrast this with the forecast cuts for those bloody civilians that will have single mums fighting with pensioners for scraps out of the waste bins at the Ritz Hotel. The amount this will cost will be regarded as well spent if it contributes to keeping the soldiers on message about that wonderful world that is Afghanistan. I wait for the first reports of a widow denied any back-pay because her husband was blown into small meaty bits on 6 May. Then came total Bread & Circus tactics with a reference to the football. A message from Capello who allegedly said
"It's important you know how much all your effort means to the England players. We want you to know that you are the real heroes." In the midst of all his problems, he sat right down and wrote a unsolicited message to Dave who, he knew, would be seeing the lads.
The PMs appreciation of the risks facing the new millionaires was demonstrated when his helicopter was - or maybe was not - targeted by a couple of terrorists getting the most out of their unlimited O2 tariff with a bit of chat. Diversions to a safe area, nice little bit of down and dirty with the chaps at a BBQ and then off to a nice kip. Contrast that to a squaddie's life of go where you are bloody well told, on foot, along a route regularly followed where the terrorists plant IED.
Sky News political correspondent Niall Paterson said the Prime Minister was keen to strengthen communication lines. "I think (Mr Cameron) recognises the fact that for quite some time, the British public have been confused as to exactly what has been happening here on the ground," he said. Mr Cameron confirmed an extra £67m will be spent on helping troops tackle roadside bombs, while doubling the size of their teams on the ground. It will also fund new vehicles, including seven Mastiff armoured patrol vehicles. Additional aid will assist the build-up of the Afghan army, police and civil service, he announced." The doubling of EOD personnel may be in doubt according to other media reports "But the PM said there were NO plans to send any more British forces to join our 9,500-strong contingent." And what is this about the build-up of Afghan resources? More to recruit and train? A report from the UK Government shows just what a dog's dinner training really is.
Then, next morning, more bonding with the troops and a jolly morning run. Cannot have been easy for him running alongside blokes who do it for real at risk of life and limb with 50 or 60 kilo of kit on their backs.
Then off to see arch-villain Karzai and more inspirational words "Speaking at a news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, the PM said: "Our publics want to see real, noticeable and marked progress this year and next" (Oh, so he does know about that 77% then) "We should all the time be asking, 'Can we go further? Can we go faster? Nobody wants British troops to be in Afghanistan a moment longer than is necessary." Why can we not determine what is necessary. The adage about stop digging if in a hole is very apposite. We are not really winning anything - even if we knew what constituted a win. In many places our presence is making things worse. Would the Taliban have executed a 7 year old kid by public hanging if we were not nearby his village? ("Taliban militants have executed a seven-year-old boy they accused of being a spy. The child was abducted from his home and taken to a neighbouring village where he was put on trial. His captors found him guilty of working for the government. The child was then hanged in public in the village of Heratiyan, in the southern Sangin district of Helmand province.")
Why flog the dead horse of training? Tribal leaders will have little faith in a nationally recruited force not made up of their own tribe - even if the endemic corruption were overcome. If we dig much deeper we will form a hole that no one will ever get out of.
This dynamic, all action, all promising PM then seemed to get off message. The question posed was "What can Cameron do about Obama's war against BP?" "answer came quite clear "Very little is my immediate answer. The President's approval ratings are biting the dust. Powerless to stem the tide of oil and unpopularity, Obama can only victimise a 'foreign' oil company. Obama may be embattled at home, but if any doubt the US President's ability to influence global events, they need only look at BP's share value and the pension funds derived thereof. BP is mired in an expensive oil disaster, but the President's rhetoric about the 'habitual environmental criminal' and threatening BP with criminal proceedings demolishes market confidence. If the British government had condemned AIG, Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch in similar tones, the US administration would have retorted. Cameron can do nothing. He cannot alter the President's strategy – Obama has no alternative. There is a further, unanswerable truth: Obama wouldn't listen to the British government in any case. Ben Brogan has written a stirring defence of Cameron, Obama and the special relationship. He admits that Cameron and Obama have only spoken once as leaders of their respective countries - on the evening of Cameron's accession. Brogan concedes that 'some might voice surprise that Mr Cameron, who has made national security his first priority, has not felt a need to call our closest military ally.' But equally, why hasn't Obama rung his closest military ally? I am sceptical that Britain's relationship with America has ever been special; but relations with the Obama administration have been decidedly frosty. Obama has other (more realistic) global priorities; but, as I've argued before, the President's anti-British tenor is starting to grate. Cameron can't influence the US, but he can urge BP to defend itself. Obama's bluster overlooks the involvement of US oil company TransOcean in this disaster. Liability remains undetermined. BP is still worth £64bn this morning: that can buy a lot of legal muscle." And answer came there clear - Very little is my immediate answer. The President's approval ratings are biting the dust. Powerless to stem the tide of oil and unpopularity, Obama can only victimise a 'foreign' oil company.
Obama may be embattled at home, but if any doubt the US President's ability to influence global events, they need only look at BP's share value and the pension funds derived thereof. BP is mired in an expensive oil disaster, but the President's rhetoric about the 'habitual environmental criminal' and threatening BP with criminal proceedings demolishes market confidence. If the British government had condemned AIG, Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch in similar tones, the US administration would have retorted.
Cameron can do nothing. He cannot alter the President's strategy – Obama has no alternative. There is a further, unanswerable truth: Obama wouldn't listen to the British government in any case. Ben Brogan has written a stirring defence of Cameron, Obama and the special relationship. He admits that Cameron and Obama have only spoken once as leaders of their respective countries - on the evening of Cameron's accession. Brogan concedes that 'some might voice surprise that Mr Cameron, who has made national security his first priority, has not felt a need to call our closest military ally.' But equally, why hasn't Obama rung his closest military ally?
I am sceptical that Britain's relationship with America has ever been special; but relations with the Obama administration have been decidedly frosty. Obama has other (more realistic) global priorities; but, as I've argued before, the President's anti-British tenor is starting to grate. Cameron can't influence the US, but he can urge BP to defend itself. Obama's bluster overlooks the involvement of US oil company TransOcean in this disaster. Liability remains undetermined. BP is still worth £64bn this morning: that can buy a lot of legal muscle."
I have repeated the link here in full - there are those wh do not 'do' links. Note though the repeated reference to military alliance. Maybe Cameron's options are limited but it might help were he to put a telephone call in and say that is the US keeps hammering we might have to withdraw from his loopy war. At least he could demonstrate some of that Henry V before Agincourt spirit he was trying to depict in Afghanistan.