Some very confused writing by Larry Elliott and Tom Clark in The Guardian today, implying that the British haven’t fought a war since 1945. Someone also has a strange understanding of the word “strong”.
David Cameron’s first 100 days in Downing Street have seen the coalition win the key argument over the economy, with a Guardian/ICM poll today showing that voters back austerity measures to reduce Britain’s record peacetime budget deficit.
That deficit is being tackled by “the most sustained cut in public spending since the war.”
Which war? The ongoing war in Afghanistan (nearly nine years and counting)? The invasion and occupation of Iraq? The bombing of Yugoslavia? The 1991 Gulf War? The Falklands War? The Korean War? No.
Apparently we are only at war if we have conscription and bombs are falling on us here at home. If its our bombs being dropped on other people, it doesn’t seem to count.
The article’s sub-headline reads:
Guardian/ICM poll to mark 100 days of coalition shows strong support for government’s cuts-based recovery strategy
… 44% of those polled said the coalition was doing a good job in securing economic recovery against 37% who said it was doing a bad job.
That really doesn’t seem very strong to me. Unlike another poll published this week:
Angus Reid Public Opinion reported only 33 percent of the 2009 adults surveyed in August said they support the use of British forces in Afghanistan, a drop of 5 percentage points since June. More than half, 57 percent, said they oppose the mission.
Americans are just as strong in their opposition to the war. Sixty two percent of them say they’re against it. And according to a ComRes poll last November, 71% of British voters wanted an end to combat missions in Afghanistan within 12 months.
But British and American voters are clearly confused. There hasn’t been a war for 65 years.