Between 4 and 20 August the Saudi Arabian government beheaded 19 people. Saudi Arabia, which has funded and armed ISIS from inception (initially with CIA support), is now bombing alongside the USA in Iraq and Syria.
Forget the war technology porn regularly being broadcast by western media, with those spectacular photos of missiles erupting from ships into the night sky. Those missiles and bombs eviscerate and maim innocents as well as combatants, children as well as terrorists. The West always first denies, then regrets, “collateral damage”. The propaganda can be laughable. During the invasion of Iraq I remember a news propaganda item about how a cruise missile can enter a specific window, being followed by the next item – the US had apologised to Syria for two missiles aimed at Iraq which had hit Syria by accident.
If we can accidentally bomb the Chinese Embassy in Serbia, we can – and do – hit civilian homes near the proposed target. Being eviscerated by a piece of flying shrapnel is no less terrible than being beheaded by a jihadist. Let us not pretend that our violence is somehow nicer. Children will be dying under our bombs soon.
Other than the two extraordinary crazed Nigerians, there have been no recent Islamic motivated terrorist attacks in the UK and even a slowdown in the propaganda of phoney attacks. This was a threat to the major financial interests of the security industry, in both its governmental and private branches.
There can be no greater nonsense than the idea that the Caliphate poses a direct threat to the UK. This is even more crazy than the claim that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the UK. But by seeking to join in the bombing campaign, and initiating a new round of fake “anti-terror” arrests in London, the British government is doing everything it possibly can do to try to provoke terrorist violence on British streets. The interests of the security state are therefore secured. I am longing for somebody to explain to me the precise mechanism by which our bombing Islamic countries helps prevent terrorist incidents in the UK. The way it can provoke such incidents seems to me too obvious to need stating. Indeed it says a great deal for the wisdom and tolerance of Britain’s Muslim communities that it has not provoked more. They could teach government a great deal about the good sense of not resorting to violence to gratify passions and earn short term acclaim.
Wolfowitz! Why can’t they just leave countries alone…
I try not to act through the lens of historical or political thinking. Most people don’t. This idea of ‘solutions’ strikes me also. I wonder if people act in such a way. (Ishmael)
As you get older, you will. Saves making the same mistakes over and over again. If you think there’s any action you can take that will significantly change anything, see if it was tried before. Did it work? If not, why not? If it did, how can it be improved? Bingo – you’ve learned from history. And saved yourself a lot of work. That’s what history’s for.
I see ‘pontificate’ is your very favourite criticism of stuff you can’t be arsed reading. Bear in mind that any opinion of yours (and mine, yes) which is not based on sufficiently detailed study of the subject is also pontification. The guy I linked to is a specialist. He approaches the issue from a Marxist standpoint, and I don’t agree with his conclusions because of that, believe me, but because they make sense to me. On the basis of my own understanding of the history.
*Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it*
Node:
Paul Calandra is a complete asshat, and renowned for his instability. Sample quote:
“I ask the Liberal Party to join with us in protecting the citizenship of Santa Claus, join with us in making sure the North Pole remains part of Canada. For all of those kids around the world who are depending on Santa Claus, I ask them to abandon their ideas and stick with us, and keep Santa Claus Canadian.” December 10, 2013
More here:
http://o.canada.com/news/national/paul-calandra-2013-video
I guess he’s realised that his dad’s pizza parlour and his daughters are losing their effectiveness as diversionary tactics when trying not to answer questions on Harper’s behalf, and Israel is a topic close to Harper’s heart, so…
Tony Blair’s been getting harder and harder to find between his headline gigs (keynote speaker at a prizegiving for the US equivalent of academy schools, following peripheral appearances round the UN GA last week. But his excreta are everywhere. A turd from Italy:
http://www.pensalibero.it/blog/2014/09/28/si-presenta-in-pubblico-il-circolo-di-cultura-politica-new-labour-tony-blair/
The Tony Blair Circle…round and round we go. Expensively. Google Translate, sorry but no speaka da Italiano.
In particular, from the experience made by New Labour and the political history and government of Tony Blair, will be further discussed in the context of globalization, the issues of relations with the firm, the effects of immigration, energy public services, welfare and sustainable then the weight and distribution of taxation. And more generally will be developed those lines of thought that, in the wake socialist, have sought and still seek to combine equality and freedom, equal opportunity and meritocracy, solidarity and competition through a happy combination of idealism and pragmatism socialist liberal .
The Association will pay particular attention to the issues related to the renewal of Europe and a new Great Covenant fundamental to reaffirm the full legitimacy to the strengthening of transatlantic relations through the EU-US cooperation agreements currently under discussion (TTIP – BZ and need to be re-launched in support of the peace process in the Middle East based on the priority recognition of the right to existence of the state of Israel in terms of security and the creation of a Palestinian state, in large international organizations to reaffirm those democratic foundations that were the basis of their constitution “
@mike
26 Sep, 2014 – 2:37 pm
Now I get it too. Islamic State, IS, ISIS, ISIL, whatever.
Another fake casus belli to allow the imperial stormtroopers to blast the beejeezus out of another Middle East country or two and grab their gas!
While of course the subtext is teaching Putin a lesson.
Just to put things into perspective before some of our regulars get carried away…
Two RAF Tornados returned to base this morning having again not dropped any bombs. The total bombs dropped so far remains at zero. Obviously there are some very strict rules of engagement in place.
Our total contribution to this effort in Iraq is just six Tornado aircraft. That means at any given time, two are being serviced, two are being refuelled and rearmed, while one is flying out and and the other one is flying back.
Not really much of a commitment by any stretch of the imagination.
Which also highlights the fact that thanks to a combination of defence cuts and government perversity, the UK is scraping the bottom of the barrel for deployable assets, has a far smaller air force than Saudi Arabia, can’t get to where we want to go without a tanker and WTF are we doing even bothering? Answer, supported by the MSM’s hysterical coverage of our lads boldly going: pure propaganda.
@Baal Zevul “I try not to act through the lens of historical or political thinking. Most people don’t. This idea of ‘solutions’ strikes me also. I wonder if people act in such a way. (Ishmael)
As you get older, you will. Saves making the same mistakes over and over again.”
This reminds me of a reference to the “lessons of history” by Prince Charles in an infamous memo:
“What is wrong with everyone nowadays? Why do they all seem to think they are qualified to do things far beyond their technical capabilities? … This is the result of social utopianism which believes humanity can be genetically and socially engineered to contradict the lessons of history … .”
I wonder what the sources of Prince Charles’ “lessons” were. Anyone care to guess?
Anon1
I’d be obliged if you’d clarify your position by answering the question I posed you earlier in this thread:
If you were an MP, would you have voted to support this operation against ISIL?
The Frame of Reference:
The answer to the Troodos Conundrum is simple. Troodos did not pick up the intercepts because they do not exist. Mossad fabricated them. John Kerry’s “evidence” is the shabbiest of tricks.
More children may now be blown to pieces by massive American missile blasts. It is nothing to do with humanitarian intervention. It is, yet again, the USA acting at the behest of Israel.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/08/the-troodos-conundrum/
Britain is complicit with America in targeting Quds Forces, Basij volunteer fighters and Shi’ites on route from Al Qamishli and in communication with their commanders in Damascus. That communication is an important element of intelligence decyphered and prioritized by Troodos.
there is a question here that I would never have dared ask Mr Shouty
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sunday-life/news/kincora-probe-detectives-had-to-ask-ian-paisley-if-he-was-gay-30623583.html
Node
Not this operation, no.
Now if you wouldn’t mind answering a question of my own.
Earlier you wrote:
The [‘Scottish referendum rigged’] report is interesting, and there’s some new stuff there I hadn’t read before including named witness statements reporting irregularities, but there are one or two questionable bits of ‘evidence’ too, for example what someone on twitter claims a postie told her mother. I only mention this because the usual suspects certainly will.
Would you therefore be prepared to admit that your ‘usual suspects’ perform a useful and perhaps vital function on this blog in ensuring that ‘questionable bits of evidence’ are brought to public attention? In your own words, you say you wouldn’t otherwise have mentioned them.
@Anon1: Perhaps the caution reflects a new unwritten convention that civilian casualties are to be avoided at all costs.
One can but hope…
@Ba’al: Saudi Arabia are contributing 4 aircraft. Clearly very much a US operation, with the coalition apparently giving it legitimacy.
I never understood how even more might makes it even more right.
Mr Goss
“The reason you have been endowed with the epithet ‘Noddy’ is because your reading appears not to have advanced beyond schoolbook texts.”
_____________________
You’re welcome to call me Noddy and you’re entitled to your opinion on my reading. But the latter has advanced far enough to enable me to avoid the sort of silly schoolboy howler you made (cf. pages 1 and 2) wrt the Falklands.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“When you can engage on an intellectual level I will withdraw.”
_____________________
Love the Fred Kite-like use of that “withdraw”. Mr Goss – a word of advice. Before you plunge in to matters you know little about, why not put a condom over your thick head first and then you wouldn’t have to withdraw.
Straw man argument, Abe. You’ll have to do better than that. Frankly I don’t know what the man’s getting at, unless it’s yet another dig at politicians like Dave and Tony. Though I’d guess Chazza can name the monarchs of England in the correct order nevertheless, probably with dates. And because someone you despise agrees with a proposition, it doesn’t mean it’s invalid.
Er…scrub that – for the Excrescences it does, doesn’t it?
“Which also highlights the fact that thanks to a combination of defence cuts and government perversity, the UK is scraping the bottom of the barrel for deployable assets, has a far smaller air force than Saudi Arabia, can’t get to where we want to go without a tanker”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Surely, if Captain Komodo-Baal (cashiered) is serious in his criticisms of the willingness of the UK to undertake military action abroad, he should welcome the above? Instead of which he sounds rather sorry about it.
You’ve put Komodo in a very difficult position, Habbabkuk.
You keep chipping away at him but he has to keep pretending he doesn’t read your comments. It must be terribly frustrating.
Anon1 29 Sep, 2014 – 12:33 pm
“Would you therefore be prepared to admit that your ‘usual suspects’ perform a useful and perhaps vital function on this blog in ensuring that ‘questionable bits of evidence’ are brought to public attention? In your own words, you say you wouldn’t otherwise have mentioned them.”
Delighted to oblige. I have said many times that I consider some of the dissenting voices on this blog to be an asset. Here’s what I posted a few months ago. I was quoting myself to Ba’al then amplifying the point. :
I’m here to learn, not to have my beliefs rubber-stamped and I can learn more from an argument than a lecture. It’s a delicious irony that some of those who try hardest to counter the prevailing beliefs on this blog are actually helping clarify them. Even you are sometimes a useful tool 🙂 but more often than not, your contributions are no more than sarcasm and mockery. Please try harder.
Zac Goldsmith (Richmond Park, Conservative)
“I thank the Prime Minister for giving way. Does he agree that if we are serious about tackling jihadi terrorism in the middle east, we must take a much tougher line with some key allies, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait, which have been fuelling and funding terrorism for decades and, if reports are accurate, continue to do so?”
Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe, Conservative)
“I do not think there is any significant controversy about the moral and legal case for what is proposed, and in five minutes I will not set it out. The world would be a better place if ISIS was destroyed, and Britain would be a safer country without doubt. The legal case for intervention in Iraq is clear with its Government’s inviting us, and I think it is pretty clear in Syria because of the genocide and the humanitarian disasters being inflicted on that country. I do agree that it is artificial to divide the two problems: the Sykes-Picot line is a theoretical line on the map now, and there is absolutely no doubt that ISIS has to be defeated in both countries.”
Steady on Ken; its one thing to accept that Sykes-Picot was misguided but another to just pretend the last 90 years didn’t happen. When I read a Line in the Sand I was shocked and impressed by how candid the book was and at what it said about us, but now I kind of see the purpose of the revelations. Its as if we have exposed our own behaviour (which may be open to some crititique) at the time of Sykes-Picot only to use it to justify our current behaviour (eh which may also be open to some criticism).
Hadn’t got around to watch this all till now. .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKSDmwKcFQA
I don’t agree btw, with Snowden that anyone can vote away my human rights. Seems to be what he’s often implying.
Menzies Campbell (North East Fife, Liberal Democrat)
“I, too, remember the speech made by Robin Cook in 2003. I remember it with great admiration and perhaps a little emotion, not least, of course, because he resigned from the Government as a result of his views and joined the rest of us who voted against them in the Lobby that evening.
This is not, however, 2003. It is an entirely different set of circumstances, an important feature of which is the fact that we would be responding to a request made by the lawful Government of Syria. [Hon. Members: “Iraq.”] I meant Iraq; I have Syria on the brain and will come back to it in a moment…..”
Liam Fox (North Somerset, Conservative)
“………..The question of oil has been mentioned but, through the international financial system, we also need to stop financial flows to ISIS. It is very well funded and we must stop groups in the region playing a double-game, publicly decrying ISIS but providing it with the funding it requires.”
Graham Allen (Nottingham North, Labour)
“Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that if the House had voted last year to go into Syria, or to bomb Syria, in effect we would have been on the same side as ISIS and fighting the same battle as ISIL, and does that not lead us all to show a great degree of caution about the fact that within one year circumstances can change rapidly in an incredibly volatile civil war going on in that region?”
George Galloway (Bradford West, Respect)
Mr Speaker……….The debate has been characterised by Members of Parliament moving around imaginary armies. The Free Syrian Army is a fiction that has been in the receipt of hundreds of millions of dollars and hundreds of tonnes of weapons, virtually all of which were taken from them by al-Qaeda, which has now mutated into ISIL. The Iraqi army is the most expensively trained and most modernly equipped army in history. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent on the Iraqi army, which ran away leaving its equipment behind. ISIL itself is an imaginary army. A former Defence Secretary no less said that we must bomb its bases. It does not have any bases. The territory that its personnel control is the size of Britain and yet there are only between 10,000 and 20,000 of them. Do the maths. They do not concentrate as an army. They do not live in bases. The only way that a force of that size could successfully hold the territory that it holds is if the population acts as the water in which it swims. The population is quiescent because of western policies and western invasion and occupation.
That is the truth of the matter. ISIL could not survive for five minutes if the tribes in the west of Iraq rose up against it.”
George Galloway (Bradford West, Respect)continued…
“They don’t like it up them, Mr Speaker. They would rather have an imaginary debate, moving around imaginary armies. ISIL is a death cult. It is a gang of terrorist murderers. It is not an army and is certainly not an army that will be destroyed by aerial bombardment. ISIL is able to rule the parts of Iraq that it does because nobody in those parts has any confidence in the Government in Baghdad, a sectarian Government helped into power by Bremer and the deliberate sectarianisation of Iraqi politics by the occupation authorities. The Government know that. That was why they pushed al-Maliki out—even though he won the election, by the way, if we are talking about democracy. They pushed him out because they knew that far too many people in ISIL-occupied Iraq had no confidence in the Baghdad Government. Nobody has any confidence in the army emanating out of Baghdad.
This will not be solved by bombing. We have been bombing Iraqis for 100 years. We dropped the world’s first chemical bombs on them in the 1920s. We attacked them and helped to kill their King in the 1930s. We helped in the murder of their President in 1963, helping the Ba’ath party into power. We bombed them again through the 1990s.”
You keep chipping away at him but he has to keep pretending he doesn’t read your comments. It must be terribly frustrating.
Thank you for advising me that the daft auld fuck is still at it. Unnecessary, only because it is always a safe assumption, and as its sole aim is distraction, Habbabreak remains permanently on. But not for you. Occasionally it pleases me to play with a mindless troll, and you’re it.
Returning to Israel’s extermination policy:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/09/gaza-crime-crimes-201492664043551756.html
Justin Raimondo at Antiwar.com:
They’re Making Stuff Up
SNIP
No one had ever heard of a group named “Khorasan” before: it simply appeared spontaneously, like Minerva from the head of Zeus – or from the head of some war propagandist somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. We are told the very name of this mysterious group was “classified,” at least according to the dubious Rep. Peter King (R-IRA), but as Glenn Greenwald points out here a great number of anonymous government officials were glad to drop this hot stuff into the eager hands of those court stenographers otherwise known as “mainstream journalists,” who dutifully “reported” it as the gospel truth.
Greenwald goes on to write: “Even more remarkable, it turns out the very existence of an actual ‘Khorasan Group’ was to some degree an invention of the American government.” My question is: to what degree isn’t “Khorasan” an invention of the American government? There is absolutely zero evidence that such a group has ever existed: no documents, no testimony, no public “intelligence” of any kind. Such descriptions of its history and character as we do have – the hurried and often contradictory explanations of anonymous US officials – all point to “Khorasan” as being a simple re-branding of an old enemy: Al Qaeda.
“Khorasan” is a marketing ploy, and the target is the American people. We’re used to hearing that the Al Qaeda bogeyman is under the bed, which is why we supposedly have to give the government carte blanche to spy on us and, while they’re at it, the whole world. This is the great problem Washington faces: it just isn’t having the same effect anymore………
Source: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/09/28/theyre-making-up-stuff/
Rory Stewart (Penrith and The Border, Conservative)
I thank the hon. Gentleman very much for giving way, but will he please bring us towards his solution to this problem?
George Galloway (Bradford West, Respect)
In five minutes it is difficult, but we have to strengthen those who are already fighting ISIL. We have to give them all the weapons they need—the Baghdad Government have paid for weapons that have still not been delivered. We have to strengthen the Kurdish fighters, who are doing a good job of fighting ISIL.
The Saudi, Emirati and Qatari armies are all imaginary armies. They have not even told their own people that they are on the masthead. Has anyone here seen a picture of them fighting in Syria? Anyone seen a picture of a Saudi jet bombing in Syria? Saudi Arabia is the
nest from which ISIL and these other vipers have come, and by the way, it does a fine line in head chopping itself. Saudi Arabia has 700 warplanes—get them to bomb. Turkey is a NATO member—get Turkey to bomb. The last people who should be returning to the scene of their former crimes are Britain, France and the United States of America.