Sunday, 29 November 2015

STOP THE WAR


I watched both Jeremy Corbyn and Stewart Hosie on the Marr show today. I thought both of them made perfect sense.

If the United Nations means to tell countries that they can bomb Syria, then they should leave them in no doubt that that is the resolution of organisation's aim.

There was the same sort of situation over the Iraq war with the English Attorney General telling Blair first that the resolution passed DID NOT and then, two days later, DID authorise military action. 

It was never totally clear but with the passage of time it seems to have been agreed that the war was illegal.

If there is no doubt about the intention this time, let us have confirmation in a proper resolution authorising war.

Fallon, on the same programme, gave a performance that was described here by Craig Murray. His interview was a tissue of lies, start to finish and far less plausible than either of the two opposition parties.

The ex-Ambassador to Syria has also rubbished the claims of the government.

War should never be contemplated until every other possibility has been explored and attempted. And even then, it should be remembered that it comes with consequences, and massive expense in terms on people's lives and of course money, which we are told we don't have. Involvement will surely bring retaliation...and why wouldn't it?

As Stewart suggested, why don't we follow the money, and the oil; cut the supply chain, which I would bet we are a part of (we export billions of pounds worth of weapons to Saudi every year, and have done so for a very long time. Until they started slaughtering the population of Yemen recently they seem not have used the weapons...)

Isil doesn't manufacture sophisticated weaponry...what would they do if they couldn't get any more guns; any more ammunition?

War, any war, is indescribably terrible and will always have repercussions. It must be the very very last resort. 

Don't read any further if you have a weak stomach. A couple of these photographs are pretty graphic. But this is what war does.
There are some very big business names that will do nicely from another war.
Send Cameron to fight one to one with the head of Isil?
Amazingly, there are members of the shadow cabinet who want to use this situation to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn.
Who supplies ISIL?
Who's regime is closest to Isil's?
And who supplies them with arms?
It's not unfair or unreasonable that those who want war should go fight it.
Same here. They can line up behind  Cameron.
Of course, few in the PLP give a stuff about what conference for the membership think. That's why they are so angry with Corbyn for asking them.
The ridiculous claims that no civilians would be injured are farcical and insult our intelligence. Have they forgotten that we read Twitter and Facebook?
And what about the refugees we will create as we bomb cities to the ground?
Fallon, Cameron and Benn may not mind having this on their consciences. I do.
You must be ashamed to Hilary, Tony
Even Tory Matthew Parris agrees.

43 comments:

  1. Too many politicians at Westminster are using the events in Paris as cover for their own agenda.
    Cameron has been desperate to go bombing in Syria for some time and is still smarting from the last defeat in the Commons on the subject.
    The Blairites in the Labour party are looking for excuses to get rid of Corbyn and voting along with the Tories will suffice in their view to undermine their "leader's" position.
    The only party which is united in supporting the rule of law and trying to ensure that the innocents in the region are not considered expendable are the SNP.
    I hope that the people of Scotland take note when it comes to the elections here over the next two years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Plaid is against the war too.

      I'm not sure if anyone has asked the Liberals... does anyone know what their line is?

      Bruce maybe?

      Delete
    2. Certainly Glyn on the National Left says Leanne will not support the war, the case has not been made for her and her party. Does any one care what the Lib Dems say, they change their minds with the wind. Bruce might know.

      Delete
  2. I only agree with air strikes if they are at specific targets such as training camps or armoured vehicles. And even then with a high degree of caution. Better to pool intelligence resources together and start targetting logists and communication lines.You can have 100 tanks but with no radio and no food or fuel, you are useless.

    Regarding Corbyn, he's safe as long as the membership back him. But between his own cockups, Ken Livingstone's mouth and the Little Red Book I can't see it lasting. Perhaps the SNP should place candidates in England next time around.

    I don't think Cameron is going to get his vote. Too many Labour MPs are worried that we have an Iraq Mark 2 on our hands, except 100 times more complicated.

    zog

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's exactly what we do have.

      Only massively more complex, and fighting to keep in charge someone we apparently wanted rid of only two years ago, because he's a viscous dictator (says UK).

      The aftermath of this could be so horrific that it will make Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, messes though they are, look like great victories.

      Don't do it.

      Britain is supposed to be the financial capital of the world (after New York and Luxembourg and probably New Delhi and Frankfurt... OK, it's somewhere in the tiop ten but it thinks its the dog's whatsits). So why can;t it do what Stewart is suggesting, and pull the rug out from under the money?

      OK, I know the answer to that.

      I hope he doesn't get it. I'd be scared for mates in large English cities.

      Matthew Parris piece I've just added above is extremely good.

      Small type but worth the effort.

      Delete
    2. Watch the Wings video of senator Graham in the US.

      In all my life there have been interventions in innumerable conflicts. There has been much blood shed. Of only one of the adventures was I totally in favour - the Falklands war. And even that was sparked by a cock up. Had the penny pinchers not withdrawn a survey vessel, had the intelligence that maps were being bought by Argentina not been noticed, that may have turned out so much differently.

      Once more we are meddling. What is the objective we are seeking to achieve? What is in our interest here? And in these cash strapped times, which other budgets are being trimmed to pay for the bombs?

      The Empire is over. We are not the policemen of the world any more. What is it with the public school mentality that "our views override everyone else and we must be always right"?

      Can we just not keep out of other peoples fights?


      Saor Alba


      Delete
    3. Yes. We seem to think it is important that the UK be there and that what we, or rather our government has to say, is vital to the running of the world.

      It's not.

      Time we leaned that.

      Delete
  3. Looks like a troll

    this is a translation from Aribic
    Chat Mzz
    Mzz
    SITE site in August
    SITE August
    Site SITE
    Top Saudi
    Top Drdashhsaudi
    Saudi voice chat Top
    Chat Roukan
    Voice chat Roukan
    Drdashhroukan cam
    Saudi market electronic
    Saudi market
    Saudi Arabia electronic markets
    Arabs com
    Arabs com market
    Arabs com markets
    Profit from the Internet
    Profit from online ads
    Working through the Internet
    Riyadh voice chat
    Chat Riyadh
    Drdashhariyad cam
    Style and voice chat
    Cam Chat Style
    Chat Style
    Chat Style
    Today Arab News
    Arab today
    news
    Aluwrdberas
    Blog
    Blog
    Any market need
    anything
    market
    Fives quorum
    Fives site
    spotter.
    jdman

    ReplyDelete
  4. Or Arabic even. ;(
    jdman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL Yep, looks like spam.

      Well, I've leave it there. It looks pretty! Even if it's nonsense!

      Delete
  5. tris

    I am no peacenik like yourself and others and am quite happy to Bomb the shite out of
    Isis BUT bombing innocent civilians is not making war its making murder..as has been
    said by more knowledgeable people than I ( Conan but one ) the one thing Syria does not
    lack is Bombs and the indiscriminate death of innocent peoples.
    One hope these plane and Bombs to not get of the ground for the sake of the innocent

    I see 70000 armed and ready local troops have suddenly appeared out of the ether
    or more the same warehouse wherein they stored weapons of mass destruction
    when Blair needed them.

    really !!!!! as they say in war the first casualty is the TRUTH .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I make no apology for wanting peace, Niko.

      As I've said many times before if Cameron has a problem with someone, I have no issues with him going out there and doing some one to one with whoever it is.

      I know that sometimes war is necessary, although I can;t see why in the 21st century, but there are always civilian casualties.

      The bombing of Dresden and the bombing of Coventry didn't just hit the big industrial sites. In both cities there were babies and children, dogs and cats, houses, homes treasured possessions, futures, lives.... ruined.

      As we have said time and time again... this is about money. Stop their money and we'll stop their war.

      Delete
    2. It's been said that the top leadership of IS has already left (just as Bin Laden had) the place where the West are bombing, and are now in Libya.

      Anyone else heard that?

      Delete
  6. cant get me head around saying Corbyn was wrong to vote against his party
    so now others can..presumably that would mean Corbyn wasn't wrong to vote
    the way he did.......Logic or not

    you really shouldn't commit murder but seeing as you did its now alright
    for me to do the same....mind I am not a politico

    as Marx said

    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others

    Groucho that is

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can you see a split coming, Niko?

      Delete
    2. tris

      we need it all this crap about winning the next election doesn't
      address the questio who wins what..had to laugh at a comment
      which stated in ten more years of Conservative rule the welfare
      state will be dismantled .
      My rejoinder is yeah but under a Blairite regime it would take
      twelve years,
      its time to clear the decks if they cant sign up to the
      old clause four

      4. To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.

      the out with them asap

      Delete
    3. I agree with you.

      But where will the right wing go?

      Bono can't give them all three figure salaries.

      Delete
    4. http://news.stv.tv/scotland/1334255-labour-mp-ian-murray-will-vote-against-air-strikes-on-is-in-syria/

      Murray will vote against. Credit to him.

      Delete
    5. So both Scottish Labour and SNP will vote against. The Liberal is too busy with other things and the Tory is...well... he's Muddle. So Scotland is against.

      Listen up Cameron with your pooling and sharing. Scotland doesn't want to send its soldiers to war and pool and share in your bloodbath..

      Delete
    6. He'll more likely abstain, as par...

      Delete
  7. Was interested to see George Galloway on the Politics Show. As much as I am miles away from him on most subjects, I thought he had the situation nailed. Thought his comment about the "moderates" was very erudite when he said: "Moderates? Aye, they'll only take half your head off".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I haven't seen the interview.

      The thing about Galloway is that sometimes, in the middle of all his "sophisticated rhetorician inebriated by the exuberance of this own verbosity" act, is a good deal of sense.

      I still waiting to find out why he promised us devo-super-max... or even what it is!

      Delete
    2. Fully agree with you Tris, but do watch it if you can. He was surprisingly lucid.

      Delete
    3. Aye Aye Capn .... LOOL

      I will Andy.

      Delete
    4. Andy: You couldn't get me a link, could you... I cant find him

      Delete
    5. Tris.
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06pwjl9/sunday-politics-london-29112015
      The Man In The Hat appears at 20:04.
      Enjoy.

      Delete
    6. I agree. He talked a lot of sense there, both on the actual war (and the number of moderates that actually are there...700 rather than the 70,000 that Cameron counted (a bit like Blair counted all these WMDs that didn't exist)... and on the question of what Corbyn should have done. He needs to face these Crypto Tories down, with their desire to sqaush the poor and fight for the empire, what!

      As Galloway said, this will not go well. it will drag on for 10 years. It will cost a fortune that we haven't got. Osborne can forget balancing the books. And the poor will suffer.

      If half the shadow cabinet of assorted right wing freaks want to vote for that, and be reminded every time they have to cut benefits to pay for it... hell mend them.

      But Corbyn blew it.

      Effectively there is now no opposition to the London government, because these people will use that ploy again to vote for all the vile Tory policies. So the Tories will pass everything becasue with the best will in the world the SNP and friends numbers can't possibly oppose 80% of the English MPs.

      Delete
  8. At what point have the West tried that well trodden path of applying sanctions to Daesh and those that have supported it's creation before resorting to violence?
    It seems to be the policy in the Middle East is the same as that of many American police departments.
    Shoot first and ask questions later.
    This seems to be a policy that sits well with the neanderthal Tories and their new pals in the Blairite section of the British Labour party.
    When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn (Joan Baez).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it would mean putting sanctions on their beloved Saudi Arabia, which would be out of the question given that they keep the arms trade going in Britain.

      I've heard it suggested that Israel is also funding them... and any thought of sanctioning Israel is anathema to the West.

      Neanderthal sounds like a good description of the British establishment.

      Time we were done with them.

      Delete
  9. tris and the others


    Petition Vote no on military action in Syria against IS in response to the Paris attacks

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/113064

    Voted meself

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Niko, I did try voting, problem I had was they has to send me an e-mail to confirm I was who I said I was, I never received my email therefore lost the vote.

      Delete
    2. Helena

      Well your heart is in the right place if not your email.

      Delete
    3. Also signed, well spotted Niko.

      Delete
  10. All our fighting in the Middle East has achieved precisely nothing, Iraq is a wreck, and with Afghanistan, if they are not fighting invaders they are fighting amongst themselves, they are the masters of self destruction, any sensible person could see as soon as the US and Allies (us and others) left, the Taliban would be back.
    We have destabilised much of that sector, now we are turning on Syria. Assad may not have been perfect, nor was Saddam, but the one thing they both did was that they kept all the religious nutters from killing each other. The Iraqii Christians had fled to Syria where they were safe along with the Syrian Christians, I wonder how many have survived and would be able to return now, none I imagine. Then of course we have Libya, another dictator deposed and another country in turmoil. I definitely see no purpose in bombing Syria, the US and the French have been at it for over a year to no good purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Good article from the Courier here. Alex Salmond suggests that ONE of the reasons Cameron is so gung ho about this is that it is splitting the Labour Party.

    Worth a read.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond/i-won-t-support-cameron-s-call-to-bomb-syria-and-here-s-why-1.913170

      Delete
    2. A rather base reason for going to war, especially as they are doing a fine job of it on their own, not that there are many good reasons for engaging in war.

      Delete
    3. Yes... and frankly I doubt if it is a reason... more from Cameron's point of view, a happy coincidence.

      But it seems that he has folded his tent. He has given them free will, which it appears will give Cameron the majority he wants. Tony Benn's son is to do the summing up... and he's in there wanting war as if he was Tony Blair's son.

      Poor Benn... what a disappointment Hilary must be.

      Delete
    4. And another is to deflect attention away from his party.

      One of the pitfalls of political leadership. You think you are doing oh so well and someone gets themselves in the paper for the wrong reasons. Happens to them all and now it's Camshafted's turn.

      zog

      Delete