Samantha
16-10-2010, 06:36 PM
When Tony Blair was first appointed Prime Minister in 1997 he apologized for the Great Famine in Ireland. Although it happened many years before, was he right to apologize?
My view:
I feel that Tony Blair didn't have to apologize for what had happened during the famine, I feel it was his own choice and he chose to do it. However, nothing that happened during the famine was Tony Blair's fault.
Furhtermore, I feel he was correct to apologize in one way, but incorrect in another.
Firstly, he should have apologized because some of the victims ancestors would have took on board his apology, thinking that they finally had justice of what happened during the famine, and the fatality and disrupt it caused.
On the other hand, he shouldn't have apologized as he wasn't around at the time, well he wasn't born either to be honest, but anyway. It wasn't his job to apologize, it was the English Government at the time who should have, but they were up on their high horse and wouldn't. Instead they would rather help other countries during the things like the Holocaust, where they helped the Jews, but the Irish were not looking for as much in their time of need.
Another thing, they didn't apologize so if England ever needed anything - God forbid, would they return the offer? And not help them or give them aid in the slightest, they shouldn't play *** for tat, they shouldn't hold grudges, it was some of the Government's fault in the time of the famine, so they should have apologized nearer the time or the place, and not years after.
You hear the saying 'better late than never' but I don't think it cuts it when many people lost their life because of the neglect from British Government.
What are your views?
My view:
I feel that Tony Blair didn't have to apologize for what had happened during the famine, I feel it was his own choice and he chose to do it. However, nothing that happened during the famine was Tony Blair's fault.
Furhtermore, I feel he was correct to apologize in one way, but incorrect in another.
Firstly, he should have apologized because some of the victims ancestors would have took on board his apology, thinking that they finally had justice of what happened during the famine, and the fatality and disrupt it caused.
On the other hand, he shouldn't have apologized as he wasn't around at the time, well he wasn't born either to be honest, but anyway. It wasn't his job to apologize, it was the English Government at the time who should have, but they were up on their high horse and wouldn't. Instead they would rather help other countries during the things like the Holocaust, where they helped the Jews, but the Irish were not looking for as much in their time of need.
Another thing, they didn't apologize so if England ever needed anything - God forbid, would they return the offer? And not help them or give them aid in the slightest, they shouldn't play *** for tat, they shouldn't hold grudges, it was some of the Government's fault in the time of the famine, so they should have apologized nearer the time or the place, and not years after.
You hear the saying 'better late than never' but I don't think it cuts it when many people lost their life because of the neglect from British Government.
What are your views?