Echoes of Tiny Blur and the great invasion of Babylon are bouncing about the walls of Whitehall.
Britain has a responsibility to take action to punish the “morally indefensible” use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime even without a UN mandate, David Cameron has suggested.
So sayeth the judge, jury and executioner. Much like the weapons of mass destruction a decade ago we have this chemical weapons attack being used as a justification for the unjustifiable. As I mentioned yesterday, we have politicians determined to demonstrate how hard they are by having a war under their belts. It seems these days as if they look upon a few thousand deaths as some sort of badge of courage to be worn with honour. Of course the little red badge of courage is always going to be worn by someone in khaki drill rather than someone in a sharp business suit. Oh, no, they won’t be getting their hands bloody, they will be nice and safe, well away from the action. Let some other poor sucker take the hit – and if a few thousand local rag-heads get slaughtered, well, that’s just collateral damage, isn’t it? After all, they have to get democracy somehow.
For a politician to utter the word “moral” is to degrade the word such that it becomes unrecognisable, for morality is something that bypassed them. Their whole corrupt, rotten existence revolves around their ability to put morals to one side and conscience to the other. It’s the only way they can do what they do – commit mass murder in the name of democracy. Y’see, those damnable Arabs just don’t get it, do they? They will have democracy even if the great Western democracies (oh, the irony!) have to bomb it into them. Even if it kills them.
I have spent a lifetime learning to despise politicians. I am someone who the political classes tend to regard as politically disengaged and cynical. Yet I am not. I believe passionately that politics should be a force for good. It is politicians that I despise so completely, for they are amoral, vacuous power-seekers who steal from us, lie to us, engage in wars in our name despite us telling them not to and then, when the consequences really hit home, they use their draconian anti-terror laws to harass and spy on us.
So, yes, I hate politicians with a vengeance. They are the criminals who should be locked up – or, better still strung up from the nearest lamp-post and their heads put on spikes outside the tower as a reminder to those planning on following the path they have trodden.
So, no, we should not engage in military action in Syria. There is not a moral case for doing so and if they do, it is NOT IN MY NAME.
It won’t be in my name either.
“like”
I strongly believe that these politicians are all now subscribing to the “Thacher School” of electioneering “If your party is in dire trouble because of your policies then start a war” because people love to be patriotic.
But where this policy is falling down both for Toeknee Blurgh and Davie (Wide Boy) Camoron is that the war’s they are involving us in are NONE OF OUR AFFAIR.
The Falklands was strongly a British affair and most people were behind the decision.
Since Blurgh’s blatant lying over weapons of mass destruction (for which I strongly believe he should have been prosecuted) people have A/ become more cynical and B/ woken up to this new generation of warmongering.
I have seen Hague today almost frothing at the mouth with anticipation as he knows in politics wars are good for business British and American business that is.
The Government has already drawn up plans for attacks on Syria so it looks to me like a foregone conclusion.
As I said yesterday Mr Camoron wants to watch his back here he is on very dodgy ground.
NOT IN MY NAME.
It’s a foregone conclusion. The only surprise is that it’s taken this long.
Your right, As I said Hague has been barracking parliament for months now laying the foundations for this, it was all decided months ago behind closed doors at one of their C.O.B.R.A meetings I have no doubt.
As soon as Hague started on about arming Syrian rebels I knew we were Fucked.
I just hope my son’s equipment is up to scratch this time and that they don’t give him the same crappy injections they gave my brother in the first gulf war, because he has suffered from all sorts ever since and got compensation for his ill health, not much of a comfort when he lost a baby to cot death as a result of the mess the MOD made of the dosages.
Margaret Thatcher did not start a war, Argentina did. The Argentinian regime’s motives were almost certainly primarily aimed at trying to distract the brutally subjugated Argentinian people from domestic affairs and unite them against an ‘evil’ foreign power which had ‘stolen’ their territory. Britain had no realistic alternative other than to go and free its citizens from invasion by a foreign power.
The use of foreign wars for domestic political purposes is probably best described as 1984-esqe.
My point was not that Maggie started the war (because she did not ) but that Maggie was the first to use this tactic against a foreign power and yes I am well aware Argentina started it.
I had friends who fought and died so am very well aware how it all went down.
But thanks for picking me up on that, I do so appreciate it.
apologies I need to rephrase that (it’s early still and I have only had one cup of tea thus far) Maggie was the first UK prime minister to use this tactic to her advantage.
I was a huge fan of what she did in the Falklands so my comment was not a criticism of her, what she did was right and proper.
What Camoron and Clogg propose is not right and is in the Toeknee Blurgh camp. Because it’s all about saving their own skins.
For Maggie her successful re election was a by product of her actions, and the point I am trying to make is, that if the two muppet boys think it will work for them it clearly won’t because the intentions are different and THAT was the point I was trying to make in my initial comment.
Clearly I don’t explain myself to everyone’s satisfaction but it is hard sometimes with dyslexia as you don’t always get it right first time, and by the time some nice soul picks you up on it is of course too late. 🙂
I have seen numerous MPs pompously intoning that the PM should take into account the “will of Parliament”.
I have yet to hear one suggest that they should take into account the will of their constituents.
They aren’t interested in their constituents’ opinions as I discovered the hard way some while back.
No – they’re only interested in their constituents at election time:- at any other time they’re only interested in their constituents’ money, to extract as much as possible of it to fund their grandiose egotistical activities.
Their name is Ozymandias…”
No the forthcoming disastrous shambles will not be in my name either.
Why should they ask their constituents or listen to valid objections from the majority of people.
The majority are bloody sheep, it doesn’t matter what these bastards do or what that other twat Blair did, the sheep still bloody well vote for them by the million, it fuckin unbelievable, just what will it take to wake the brainwashed proletariat up from their reality telly drug induced stupor.
Regards
Judd
Dear Messrs. Cameron & Clegg,
You do not get to play the glorious leader card now. Syria is no threat to either the UK or the US.
Perhaps you are unaware that the means of someone’s death is actually rather less important than the *fact* of their death. It matters not one whit whether an innocent is killed by chemical or ballistic weapons. Either way, they’re dead. It’s the “dead” part that matters, not whether the killing was performed according to some utterly arbitrary, hypocritical, rules of military ethics.
War is the last resort of the skilled diplomat, but the default response of the incompetent politician. How do you two wish to be remembered? As skilled diplomats, or incompetent warmongers?
Yes, Syria is facing a civil war. It may well be long and bloody, and that’s very sad for those forced to watch from the sidelines, but it’s also *good*: it means Syria’s people are actually *buying into* the notion that they are, in fact, responsible for what their nation does in their name and have a chance at creating their own destiny.
This is something that, thanks to the reckless interference of the USA and UK, Iraqis and Afghans never had the chance to do. And that’s why both nations have been reduced to basket-cases with little hope of any real solution in the near-term. You have made far more enemies there than friends. As wars on “terror” go, this is an idiotic strategy—not that there has ever been much evidence that any strategic planning ever took place outside a political PR agency.
The British had their own civil war. So did the Americans, the French, the Italians and pretty much every developed nation. History strongly suggests that civil wars are part of the national ‘coming of age’ phase: a necessary evil to purge the old ways and bring in the new. Such wars are often bloody, painful and unpleasant, but so are most forms of surgery.
Don’t interfere.
Finally, consider this: There is more than one way to bring down a government, and not all involve violence:
If you’ve been watching Transport for London’s recent “Running London’s Roads” documentaries, you can’t have missed how fragile London’s infrastructure has become due to long years of underinvestment and lousy planning. Notice how brittle it is, how easy it would be for someone to shatter it completely and bring the entire south-east of the UK to a standstill. Not just for a day, but for as long as we wanted.
All the UK’s economic, financial and political eggs are in that one very, very fragile basket.
If you thought Croydon was the acme of dissatisfaction, or the Winter of Discontent was as bad as it could possibly get, you are in for a hell of a shock. And, of course, if you decide to invade Syria, you won’t have enough of an army left in the UK to help out, will you?
Sleep well.
well said Sean.
“War is the last resort of the skilled diplomat, but the default response of the incompetent politician.”
Beautifully put, Sean! I do hope you don’t mind if I shamelessly steal that little gem and use it liberally at every available opportunity! I will make every attempt to give you full credit, although the temptation to claim it as my own will be very strong … 😉
And I really, really hope that you will send your whole comment in one form or another to your MP, or to Cameron, or to Clegg, or the the papers – or to someone. It’s just too good not to be more widely distributed and seen. And if you don’t – then please can I??? 😀
Hi Jax,
I don’t live in the UK at present, and where I do live isn’t considering invading Syria. So do feel free to use as much of the post as you like.
XX Britain has a responsibility to take action to punish the “morally indefensible” use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime even without a UN mandate, David Cameron has suggested.XX
Oh?
“Bummer” Harris;
“In Mesopotamien kommandierte er ein Geschwader Vickers Vernon. Von 1930 an war er im Luftstab für den Nahen Osten tätig, wo er an der blutigen Niederschlagung verschiedener Aufstände der dortigen Bevölkerung gegen die britische Kolonialherrschaft beteiligt war. Dabei setzte er Streubomben, Zeitzünder, Tretminen und Giftgas gegen die Zivilbevölkerung ein.”
In Mesepamia he commended a squadron……..From 1930 he was a member of the air staff for the middle East. Here, he was involved in the put down of various revolutions of the local people, in which he used shrapnel bombs, Time bombs, foot-mines and POISON GAS(!) against the civilian people.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Harris#
So, Commyron, when do the civilians of the Middle East get an apology for THAT!??
(AND; Please note, that that piece of text does NOT appear in the ENGLISH version of Wiki!!! WHY could THAT be???)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Arthur_Harris,_1st_Baronet For comparrison.
My view on this for Cameron is the same as for Blair’s comments earlier this week – made I note before Blair climbed back aboard his friend’s 6 story motor yacht and continued sunning himself.
If Cameron feels so strongly about teaching Assad a lesson then let him be the first one to go over there. Give the bastard a uniform and a weapon and send him over first.
Too many of our politicians seem all to willing to put other people’s sons and daughters in the line of fire. Easy to make a sacrifice when someone else will be sacrificed isn’t it.
As a mother of one of the Son’s thank you ,John what you say is so true.
What’s a contract on the serial liar & catholic crawler Blair, worth?