Britain Denies Using Troops to Boost Bush's Standing

[leftchick]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20041017/pl_nm/britain_iraq_dc&cid=615&ncid=1480

<snip>
LONDON (Reuters) - The British government rejected accusations Sunday that it might reposition British troops to more dangerous areas in Iraq (news - web sites) to boost George W. Bush's political position in the U.S. presidential election race.

Responding to reports that military chiefs are resisting U.S. requests for British troops to be sent to more dangerous areas of Iraq, Health Secretary John Reid dismissed claims a redeployment of troops would be a "political gesture."

"For people to suggest that there is some tawdry political deal here, I think, diminishes the effort that has been made by our soldiers on the ground," he told BBC television.

"There will be occasions when you are fighting in coalition when, at a given tactical level, you operate under your ally's control."

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. Spot the Labour buzz phrase for today

"Labour's general election supremo Alan Milburn told the BBC Radio 4 The World This Weekend: "People will look pretty askance at those who are saying somehow or other there is some sort of tawdry political deal that has been done here."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/17/uhoon.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/10/17/ixportaltop.html

Strangley enough, no-one from the Tories or Lib Dems have called it a 'tawdry political deal'; but the government has denied it twice, through different cabinet members.

[mbperrin]

2. Is tawdry the vocabulary word of the week?

The Cheneys also used it in their whine this week.

[young_at_heart]

3. Politics in Iraq? How absurd!

How could anyone suggest such blatant chicanery?