I may not be able to post tomorrow as I am travelling all day from Ramsgate up to St Andrews to take part in a debate, speaking against the motion that “This House Would Resort to War to Prevent a Nuclear Iran”.
The debate will be in Lower Parliament Hall in St Andrews, starting at 19.30 on 17 November. I am sorry I can’t tell you yet who else is participating, because as with all highly topical debates it has been put together as short notice. I view campaigning to prevent the terrible death toll that a war would bring as my top priority at the moment.
Komodo
two wrongs don’t make a right. And I suppose Iraq and Saudi would want one if Iran had one etc. etc. until some nutter with his finger on the button decides that he will get his rewards in heaven. Logic of the the nut house I’m afraid.
“Foreign Ministry sources said Ireland had undoubtedly become the most hostile country to Israel in the European Union, “pushing all of Europe’s countries to a radical and uncompromising approach …” (Ynet)
.
.
So funny! As if little Ireland could “push” all of Europe into anything. The Irish Minister for Justice and Defense is a committed Zionist
{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Shatter}
(it’s an indication of my rampant antisemitism that I didn’t even know he was Jewish until about 12 months ago), and a Zionist interfered in and influenced our Presidential election. (Connolly stated that his “main problem with Norris in recent times has been his outspoken criticism of Israel”.)
http://electronicintifada.net/blog/david/israel-lobby-dictates-who-may-run-irelands-president
.
Left to our own devices, the chances are high that we – having been the first state in the world to elect two female heads of state in succession – would next have elected the first ever openly gay head of state. But Zionist interference put a stop to it. One wonders how it would have sat with Israel to see an Irish president who was the ex-lover of Ezra Itzhak Nawi (well known Israeli activist on behalf of Bedouins in the West Bank)
{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_Nawi#Activism}
.
So we don’t have Norris, we have Michael D (you won’t hear him called anything else in Ireland). And he’s a decent man. He has a strong record on human rights and has his own criticisms of Israel. Presumably he didn’t have the slimmest of skeletons in his closet that Zionists could get their teeth into.
.
Anyway, (you Zionists reading this), you can relax. The Irish President has no real power and can’t travel without the say-so of the Government. He can’t even make a political speech without the text being vetted. He’s a bit like the British Monarch and has virtually no executive functions.
So he won’t be “pushing Europe” anywhere. Or throwing rocks. Irrespective of what various fickle Facebook groups may be recommending.
.
What Alan Shatter will be doing is another matter.
“North Korea shows that holding even one nuke is an insurance policy.”
.
Given what’s been going on in the past 10 years or more, if I was Iranian, that’s certainly the way I’d be thinking. And who could blame them? But nevertheless, there is no smoking gun. There is no evidence that that is what they are doing – making a nuke. Just huff and puff from the US and Israel.
And John Bolton, the creep, is talking about Iran having no right to regional “hegemony” — while his own country thinks it has a perfect right to hegemony over the planet.
How twisted do you have to be to think (and talk) like that?
“Is this the theory that underlies suicide bombers??”
.
It’s the theory that underpinned Western policy in respect of nuclear weapons for over thirty years. It is the orthodox view. It stresses the importance of nuclear “balance” in maintaining peace.
Karl Rove: “Who Gave You the Right to Occupy America?”
http://www.truth-out.org/karl-rove-flips-out-protesters-who-gave-you-right-occupy-america/1321459874
.
🙂
Best of luck tonight, Craig. Give ’em hell.
Stephen
quote
‘No I don’t believe in the doctrine. Is this the theory that underlies suicide bombers??’
Stephen this makes me question ‘your sanity’.
Logic and rational thinking as well.
So you don’t believe in the ‘MAD’ doctrine because of suicide bombers.
You couldn’t make this up.
Sorry.
Komodo
two wrongs don’t make a right..
WTF has that to do with the argument? I’m talking about ONE wrong: helping to arm the only non-Muslim country to the teeth and encouraging it to threaten its neighbours. Saudi’s been kept out of the nuclear loop by the West; might we not have considered doing the same with Israel?
Christ, if I were an ayatollah, I’d have the population assembling nukes in their kitchens by now, given the level of nuclear threat the country faces, and given that every Republican president since Reagan, and their chickenhawk dual-allegiance advisors (do research Bolton: he’s a honey) have been announcing plans for regime change for Iran.
Two wrongs, eh? Want to go back to the installation of the Shah?
David Cameron at the age of 24 when in thatcher government travelled to south africa and helped Israel obtain nuclear weapons, with him was the later Dr David Kelly
Clearly this house believes in the motion that “Iran should be encouraged in its efforts to develop the Bomb so as to neutralise the threat presented to the current regime by Israel/US/its own people if it were to hold fair elections etc. etc.” Somehow I doubt that this is a line Craig will be taking in the debate that is unless he wants to hand the argument on a plate to the other side.
To think that there used to be a time when most on the Left understood the lunacy of “Bombs for Peace” – but then they didn’t see Assad, Gadaffi, Saddam, Ahmaddinejad, Milosevic and their ilk as heroes who they needed to stand behind. If that is where the Left really stands today – all I can say is “not in my name”
before he was assassinated JFK was trying to get Israel lobbyist to register as foreign agents and also trying to get inspections in the Dimona Nuclear Plant, after his death the Israeli lobbyist no longer needed to register and the Israel nuclear ambitions were not interfered with.
“This House Would Resort to War to Prevent a Nuclear Israel”.
No, wait a moment…
“but then they didn’t see Assad, Gadaffi, Saddam, Ahmaddinejad, Milosevic and their ilk as heroes who they needed to stand behind.”
.
Nobody has said that here, Stephen, you’re a right pain in the arse. But if I’d been anywhere near Gadaffi, with a gun in my hand, I’d have defended him from that disgraceful bloodthirsty lynch mob, and tried to get him DUE PROCESS.
Stephen
Quote
‘/its own people if it were to hold fair elections etc. etc.”’
Your statements are now verging on the bizarre.
The US hasn’t had a fair election in at least 20 years, probably longer.
Its voting machines are a disgrace and the one with the most votes – loses. The Supreme court – a jewish joke – chooses its presidents from time to time.
All its candaidates are AIPAC chosen and bought with very few exceptions. The Pauls, Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders – I think thats his name – the independent Senator.
You do write drivel.
American democracy makes many a third world country look good and is no where near the democratic reality that ruled Gaddaffi’s Libya.
Nuid
But if I’d been anywhere near Gadaffi, with a gun in my hand, I’d have defended him from that disgraceful bloodthirsty lynch mob, and tried to get him DUE PROCESS.
More than NATO did.
Have you seen the footage on the internet clearly showing a NATO stormtrooper right there watching the murder.
“American democracy”
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2011/11/14/us-nuclear-powered-submarines-near-venezuela-and-the-benghazi-formula.html
Nuid
So how would you go about getting due process for Assad and Ahmadjinedad? Thoughts please.
D
So you would get fair elections in Iran by holding fair elections in the US? So who is being bizarre. I’m afraid I’m not big on moral relativism.
“The democratic reality that ruled Gaddaffi’s Libya.” – might I suggest that your skills in recognising drivel are not particularly good. No on second thoughts that statement is not drivel – it is excrement.
It’s fair elections, now, is it? Only because you think it might remove Ahmedinejad. Fair elections resulting in the election of Hamas to the PA could safely be ignored, and were.
Anyway, we can see the result of fair elections here. A kleptocracy of the centre – right, or a kleptocracy of the far-right, based on the demands of the unelected “market”, whatever side of the party fence you fall. And if you stay on it, you get the far right anyway. Fair enough, I guess you’re saying..
“Have you seen the footage on the internet clearly showing a NATO stormtrooper right there watching the murder.”
.
No, Daisy, I didn’t. But it’s hard to believe that no instructions were issued regarding the possible capture of Gadaffi or any of his family. A NATO strike had already killed one of his sons + two grandchildren. They knew what would happen. The bastards.
Tell you something, Stephen. There’s no moral high ground here. It’s been bombed flat. We have supported at one time or another some of the worst bastards of the late 20/21st century. When we have knocked them off their perches, it has been exclusively for our own convenience, commercial, political, whatever. You are deluded if you think this is altruism. In the process, millions of people have been killed and displaced. Then we introduce fair elections to install a more compliant puppet. Happily, those countries are beginning to catch on.
The Yanks had a saying about those people: “He’s a bastard, but he’s our bastard”
What makes you think the majority of patriotic Iranians want our bastard as opposed to their bastard? Votes for women? In a traditionally patriarchal Muslim society? You’ll have to do better than that.
Komodo
I would say fair enough – if you really believe that the arguments here are representative of the left then in those terms the vast majority of us are somewhere on the centre or right – indeed I would go as far as saying we are the 99%.
Someone earlier said Orwell was their hero, as he is one of mine. Do you really think that Orwell would have really accepted criticism of the UK/US/Israel as an acceptable defence for the human rights abuses and disregard of democracy of its opponents. Being a neo fellow traveller is not the correct response to the neo cons.
“There’s no moral high ground here.”
There is if you want to look.
Stephen,
It’s Ahmadinejad.
And that’s as much of my “thoughts please” as you are entitled to.
Sorry to post again but Stephen must be answered .
His statements are quite ridiculous.
This one for instance
‘Gadaffi, Saddam, Ahmaddinejad, Milosevic and their ilk as heroes who they needed to stand behind. If that is where the Left really stands today – all I can say is “not in my name”’
How wrong can you get.
I really enjoy reading comments and I can tell you there is a very interesting pattern that turns Stephens assumptions on their head.
Take Libya recently.
Now anyone can check this out.
Quite often comments on the Guardian were roughly two thirds for the attack – full of self important and oh so humane ‘human rights’ intolerant enforcers unable to see that imposing by mass murder and total destruction, a gang of CIA front islamic terrorists and ‘has been politicians’ who lived in the west for years, was a worse option than Gaddaffi at his worst.
These comments screaming for justice for the Libyan people at the point of a NATO missile received overwhelming support.
However the Telegraph readers were the opposite.
Probably three quarters if not more of the comments opposed the bloodshed.
Many were extremely anti the military and Cameron and his government – well…the opinion of that bunch of losers was graphic.
Here is an example
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100081828/10-reasons-why-we-shouldnt-be-in-libya/
Look at the best rated comments.
This was consistent right through.
So Stephen like Serbia, if not so much Afghanistan and Iraq (although both were opposed across the political spectrum) those who most opposed the illegal NATO attacks on both – of bombing defenseless civilians on behalf of islamic extremists and terrorists – were most likely to be on the right not the left.
Wrong again I am afraid.
Nuid
Play this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM23k_LXWlc
Your perception of the “right” ness of the majority is of course conditioned by an electoral machine which permits nothing else. I’m Right on some things, and hard-Left on others. There is no need for anyone’s views to be moulded into the shape of Cox’s or Box’s consolidated party hat. And it is not democracy when those individual views cannot be recorded in isolation from the party holding an unacceptable position on other matters. End the party whip in Parliament, Ind I think that would be a good start. A democracy that did not involve parties at all would be even better.
.
Anyhow, Israel sucks.
🙂
No, what looks like high ground to you is a festering swamp to an ayatollah. And vice versa. I know relativism is a dirty word, but no-one shares absolute values in practice.
@ Daisy
If not already’ read George Tenet’s / Feb 11th, 2003 paper.
There is your possible FF. That does not mean it will be an internal affair.
Because what he said is your device. I know what he is talking about. Some bits are missing for obvious reasons. Parking that anywhere under United Stated government jurisdiction is an act of war. Parking it where they do signals a decapitation. Assume there may be slight signals alerting your senses that …this is unusual. I’m confident the device and Iran are linked. That does not imply that those acting under guidance from the top Iranian religious leaders are responsible. The hardware would need to be ready before the device can be found, Iran can be blamed and hit quickly. The Israeli plan is vulnerable to failure. The Iranians have in their favour small shoulder fired sams. Having a plentiful supply of the latest Russian SFR, will leave Israeli pilots unable to use defensive measures against the missiles. They will not have time to act. If Iran can shoot down enough Israeli aircraft, Israel will be weakened. It has crossed my mind that Iran actively seeks a military engagement.
“oil opportunities”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-15772059
The Iraq War Inquiry report has been delayed until at least summer 2012
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/11/17/iraq-inquiry-report-to-be-delayed_n_1098808.html
.
My sources have revealed the delay came from the cabinet office and is a direct result of high level talks with America. America is engaged in a plan to refer Syria to the International Criminal Court in an effort to formally declare the Damascus government a “war criminal” that will effect NATO and Israeli military operations on Syria shortly after November 30th.
.
I believe Sir Gus O’Donnell KCB is directly involved in the Iraq war report delay because of concerns over its effect on the UK’s international relations and the effect on an imminent war with Syria which, as I have reported here, is intended as a pre-cursor for an attack on Iran in a so called ‘self defense scenario’ – believing Iran will, in some way, move to protect Syria.
.
I have written to Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu advising him of attempts to isolate Syria and of an International push by Britain and America to gain legitimacy for the Syrian National Council.
.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem should immediately call on the Arab league to monitor foreign intervention in Syria and for a peace plan to be formulated as a fire-wall against further pressure from the West.
.
Christian and other organisations in Syria should continue and expand pro-Assad rallies so that millions are witnessed in support of the Syrian government.