There has been remarkably little media commentary on the effect of the UK leaving the EU Common Foreign Policy, even though this is a major aim of Johnson, Gove and the Tory Brexiteers. The media appear not to have noticed the existence of the Common Foreign Policy. We saw perhaps the first public glimpse of the UK’s new foreign policy yesterday when Boris Johnson breached the EU Common Foreign Policy to join Donald Trump in denouncing the Iran nuclear treaty. As the UK has not actually left the EU yet, that was bad faith and an illegal act against an EU treaty obligation, but following the law is evidently of no concern whatsoever to Johnson.
There could not have been a more apt symbolism than the fact that on the day of the Supreme Court judgement that he had acted unlawfully in proroguing parliament, Boris Johnson’s major public engagement was a press conference sitting alongside Donald Trump. That is the future of the Tory version of Brexit. Other Lexit options are theoretically available, but this is what the UK’s current government intends you to get.
Of recent years EU foreign policy has been fairly characterised as neo-con, though it has rowed back somewhat from the high water mark of endorsement of the destruction of Libya. But freed from common positions on Iran, Russia, Syria and issues such as climate change, we are going to see a much more full-on neo-con approach from the UK – and one which, as now over Iran, is openly allied with the USA and against Europe. Some of the things Johnson said about the Iran nuclear deal on Monday in New York were jaw-dropping even by Johnson’s standards. “I think there’s one guy who can do a better deal and one guy who understands how to get a difficult partner like Iran over the line and that is the president of the United States,” is but one example.
My reading of Trump is that he is as contemptuous of brown-nosers as he is of opponents, but let that play out. What is plain is that, if Johnson survives as PM and Brexit goes through, Trump is going to have an unquestioning acolyte in Johnson. As I have previously reported, this is crucially going to extend to UK support for Trump’s Israel policy. It will very probably lead to UK support for Israeli annexations in the Jordan Valley – which EU Common Foreign Policy would not allow – and Johnson plans an announcement before Christmas on the moving of the UK Embassy to Jerusalem.
Johnson also blamed Iran for direct involvement in the attacks on the Saudi oil facilities at Khurais and Abqaiq. This is far from proven, and I am utterly confused by the narrative the western government and media complex has been pumping out on the event. We have been treated to an update of the Singapore Gun Myth. My generation and older were brought up to believe that Singapore had fallen in World War 2 because the guns were all fixed pointing out to sea and the attack came by land. In fact this was largely untrue and in any event not the main problem, which was appalling generalship and resulting rock-bottom morale. We are now nonsensically told that all of Saudi Arabia’s air defences only point South towards Yemen and therefore missiles from Iran crept in the side.
This is absolutely untrue. Saudi Arabia’s entire weapons capacity is massively focused on Iran, as are the manifold detection devices of the numerous US bases. Besides modern air defence systems are omnidirectional. The Patriot missile defence system is not the best in the world, though it is the most expensive; however you cannot just creep up behind it and shout “boo!” Not even the Saudis would pay billions of dollars for that.
Nor is it true that the Patriot system cannot detect cruise missiles. While it may have been designed with long range ballistic missiles in mind, it was only ever intended to intercept them in the last phase of their approach and cannot detect at more than 70km away. Saudi Arabia spent $1.57 billion dollars on PAC3 missiles: “A new Patriot advanced capability (PAC-3) missile has increased effectiveness against tactical ballistic and cruise missiles through the use of advanced hit-to-kill technology. Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor, with Raytheon the systems integrator. The PAC-3 has a Ka-band millimetre wave seeker developed by Boeing.”
That drones evaded the defences seems possible. That is a fascinating demonstration of the new possibilities in assymetric warfare. As we witnessed in Gatwick, even entirely non-existent drones can be very effective. That cruise missiles were involved seems unlikely unless a very large number were launched – there has been no claim of any intercepts. The cruise missile claim is of course the grounds for the claim of Iranian involvement. That any substantial number of cruise missiles were launched from Iran into Saudi Arabia and none of them were picked up by the defences of the numerous warships in the Gulf, by the US military bases or by the Saudi air defences is so improbable as to be utter nonsense.
Any event which leads to a massive but very temporary spike in the oil price will have potential beneficiaries aside from where we are being told to look. On present public knowledge, however, a Houthi attack with drones seems the most probable explanation, as indeed the Houthis have claimed. Given the appalling bombardment from the air of Houthi civilians, I would regard such an attack as entirely justified. The addition of cruise missiles from Iran to the story seems to me wildly improbable but an entirely predictable propaganda ploy. It does however give us a glimpse of what the future of Trump/Johnson foreign policy could hold for the UK.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
IF YOU LIVE IN THE UK, PLEASE SIGN MY PETITION FOR OFFICIAL INTERNATIONAL OSCE OBSERVERS FOR THE NEXT SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM
Exactly which law has Johnson broken?
Knock yourself out
https://www.ft.com/content/5724ceb4-deb4-11e9-9743-db5a370481bc
So the Supreme Court can see into the mind of the PM and determine what he is thinking? – god help the rest of us – what complete and utter folly – presumably it suits remainers to believe they are always correct, even when they are not? This decision is unconstitutional and renders the Supreme Court and Gina Miller as our latest brand of government – who elected them? Democracy is DEAD, thank you
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2019/09/25/exclusive-why-this-supreme-court-was-never-going-to-find-bojos-proroguation-legal/
Jenny:
Is that the best you can do to suggest that the Supreme Court is biased?
The link you supply gives practically zero evidence that members of the Supreme Court are biased.
The truth is, and you know it, is that Johnson was trying to prevent the democratic operation of Parliament by imposing a Prorogation that was designed to do just that. There is no question about that – well only for complete numbskulls and deniers.
It seems obvious to me that we need a proper written constitution and then we wouldn’t need to involve the Supreme Court in political matters like this.
@Garth 19.09.25.12.42
Actually if the supreme court consider the convenience of closing parliament sufficient proof, and we accept that. Then the argument in Jenny’s link cannot simply be dismissed. If Johnson had motive for his decision and that is enough to find against him then so too do the judges in the case, and if there was a higher court then perhaps it would be grounds for apeal
@Garth Carthy
“The truth is, and you know it, is that Johnson was trying to prevent the democratic operation of Parliament…”
In order to thwart the anti-democratic determination of Parliament to prevent Brexit, for which the UK electorate had voted.
It is ironic that the Prime Minister should have to fight Parliament – which theoretically represents the voters – in order to do what the voters unmistakably asked for.
After several centuries of the “unwritten constitution” and the belief in “representative democracy”, the Brexit fiasco has unmistakably demonstrated that MPs do NOT seek to carry out the wishes of the people. In this case, they have fought tooth and nail to thwart them.
If MPs find themselves in such a morally untenable position, their only decent recourse would be to dissolve Parliament and hold a General Election. That would allow the voters to kick all the treacherous MPs who have been resisting Brexit high over Big Ben, and elect some fresh MPs who will promise to carry out Brexit.
As the dust settles – whether we get Brexit or not – the period 2016-2019 will be seen by historians as the time when the elaborate pretence that the UK was a democracy crumbled and fell to the ground.
If Johnson had supplied a witness statement the court would have had some idea of what he was thinking. But in his arrogance he chose not to. The court was entitled to take their own view of this as Johnson’s legal advisers must have told him they would.
“Be you ever so mighty, the law is above you” Lord Denning
Not sure it was arrogance, even Johnson knows about the risks of perjury.
That was the point, he didn’t dare try to spin the web of lies in front of the judges but hid behind ‘Downing Street Sources’ and vague hints at bias.
Cowardly as well as untrustworthy; Johnson is the complete package.
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/5724ceb4-deb4-11e9-9743-db5a370481bc
Jenny
” The Government argues that the Inner House could not do that because the prorogation was a “proceeding in Parliament” which, under the Bill of Rights of 1688 cannot be impugned or questioned in any court. But it is quite clear that the prorogation is not a proceeding in Parliament. It takes place in the House of Lords chamber in the presence of members of both Houses, but it is not their decision. It is something which has been imposed upon them from outside. It is not something on which members can speak or vote. It is not the core or essential business of Parliament which the Bill of Rights protects. Quite the reverse: it brings that core or essential business to an end.”
Johnson and Rees-Mogg lied when they said it was a normal prorogation, because in fact the approach of brexit meant it was not a normal prorogation but a means of shutting parliament up.
We all know that Johnson is a liar from his lies about Russia poisoning the Skripals. We all know that Rees-Mogg is a gambler, i.e. hedge fund manager, and he therefore has a conflict of interests between his defence of British interests in his private employment.. We also now know , thanks to Craig, that Johnson has a conflict of interests between what he hopes to achieve personally from a No Deal with the EU and his PM responsibility to defend British interests.
What urgently needs to be done now, building on this ruling by the 11 judges, is for conflict of interest legislation to be brought before the house, especially covering the present scenario in which servants of the people , Johnson and Rees-Mogg, lie to the people while serving their own or others’ interests instead of the interests they are paid to defend which is yours and mine.
Democracy is very much alive. Thank God. The fascists have been slain by the Red Cross of St George, in the form of the Judiciary. The Red Cross of St George if you recall was the Fascists’ fake slogan to cover up their treason against me and you.
FT
I can’t force readers to read what I’ve copied and pasted from your site, but if they have read what I have pasted above from here and not from you, I suggest you send them the bill. otherwise if the mods would be so kind as to delete the extract for which FT wants to be paid. Thanks. Just a word of reference to Craig’s link would do.
Courts of law look into people’s minds all the time to determine what they are thinking. In this case, the Supreme Court was right to ask itself what the Prime Minister’s motive was for the five week Prorogation at that particular time. Whether it was correct or not is another matter.
…”This decision is unconstitutional”…
Really; of which “constitution” do you speak?
Who’s paying for miller’s interference? And who wants a supreme court judge who favours spiders??? What statement was she making with that?
And what about the ag, he inspires a TOTAL lack of confidence in the Govt’s judgment.
Afraid you’ve shot yourself in the foot there, quoting a summary compiled by the trustifarian teenage scribblers on the FT…..
I always enjoy your articles, even those containing grievous grammatical errors.
“Breech” indeed.
Kind regards
He dreamt he was sovereign not Parliament.
“My reading of Trump is that he is as contemptuous of brown-nosers as he is of opponents, but let that play out.” Agreed.
This is the case with many who grab high office. Others serve a purpose for them.
It would be my take on the situation for Scotland too. All the ProudScotButs in Scotland, and the London centred media Scots political commentariat will find themselves not Brit enough when the crunch comes. it’s found throughout the history of Brit rule.
Hearing a Brit ex-army officer say, “the highlands will never vote for independence, fine ghillies and they make damn fine soldiers too”, sums it up.
Yes they went from proud rebels that held Edinburgh in contempt never mind London, to lackeys in a couple of generations, and “no great mischief if they fall”.
“We are now nonsensically told that all of Saudi Arabia’s air defences only point South towards Yemen and therefore missiles from Iran crept in the side.”
We were initially told the opposite, that Saudi’s air defences all pointed towards Iran, and thus couldn’t defend against a Yemeni attack from the south. That was after the Houthi claim of responsibility, but before the accusation against Iran developed. I rather liked the idea that the Saudi military turn off the radars and missiles after hours and at weekends – that would be very typical of them.
Bahrain
HMS Jufair is a British Royal Navy base, located in the Gulf of Persia.
It would be very surprising if our Navy did not report missile attack incoming to Saudi and coming from Iran.
HMS Duncan is there in the Gulf to dissuede Iran and to monitor Iran.
That to me also sounds like a diversion. I would have thought that these systems work on an automatic alert and do not need someone to watch a CCTV monitor all the time, otherwise they would be worthless. These stories all serve to deflect from the fact that there is now a proven big gap in the defence systems of the US and allies, something that may have deterred an immediate retaliation because of the unknown consequences. The emperor has been exposed in all his naked glory.
Of course those defences are worthless, that was why I mentioned it. You can’t judge Saudi by normal standards such as “it’s not logical to do that”. As I said on the last thread, the people who sit in the Saudi military really have very little interest in fighting for Saudi Arabia, except for a very few – the pilots maybe.
So you reckon these expensive systems are not run by US technicians or operatives on the ground then you are falling into deliberately believing misinformation. The US would not let the chance of leaving their defensive systems purely for the Saudis to turn them of, there is potential for mass reputational damage.
Although I wasn’t being entirely serious, as I don’t actually have any specific information about those missiles, yes I could imagine more complex relationships between US advisors and Saudi operators which mean that in effect they’re not operational at the weekend or after hours. Saudis normally insist on running the show, and quite how things are done is often complicated.
@SA
But the reputational damage is even more colossal if the systems were manned by trained American personnel.
There is no way of avoiding the conclusion that these attacks have destroyed, beyond repair, US claims to supply effective air defence systems.
Russian, Chinese, Iranian and Indian air defence systems work. American ones don’t. It’s as simple as that. They are produced, not by Raytheon and Lockheed, but by the Acme Corporation.
‘breech’ – a pair of buttocks LOL
That is how Steve Bell portrays him in the Guardian (the only decent thing there nowadays).
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2019/sep/24/steve-bell-on-boris-johnsons-suspension-of-parliament-cartoon
Well said to Craig. Johnson needs more of the same. He should go IF he had any honour. Yet another ‘if’.
‘breech’ – a pair of buttocks
theoreticallly
Steve Bell is a Britnat bigot when it comes to Scotland. It’s Martin Rowson who gets us properly.
I have no time for Steve Bell any more.
Exactly!
Yes I agree, he seems to go so far and no further.
Unfair to single out Johnson for this, every PM that I can remember since I started paying attention has sided with the US. It’s what they do.
Corbyn wouldn’t. Which is why he is regarded as unacceptable, by liberal and conservative media alike.
Corbyn’s never been PM though.
Corbyn is not likely to become Prime minister, he dithers far too much.
Except Harold Wilson who refused to send British troops to Vietnam in support of the United States.
Cabinet papers released under the 30 year rule showed that Harold Wilson did not feel able to send troops to Vietnam.
He was worried that there was a very vocal group of Labour MPs who opposed the idea. You have to remember that Labour had been out of power for 13 years and only had a tiny majority.
I think that President Kennedy did very well to resist sending ground troops and it is clear that he was planning to pull out the advisors if he was re-elected. U S policy changed markedly after Johnson killed him.
@ Tony September 26, 2019 at 13:01
As did much else – US Govt. Dollars against scam Federal Reserve, JFK’s policy of nuclear non-proliferation to Israel, proper taxing for Big Oil shelved, CIA left in place, instead of disbanded and replaced by an ‘accountable Intel Agency’; J Edgar Hoover not retired…
Yes, you are right.
And the terrible coups in Brazil, Indonesia, Greece and Iraq.
These would have been less likely if JFK had remained president.
Also, the landing on the moon would probably have been a joint venture with the USSR. Perhaps Khrushchev would have remained in power.
Lyndon Johnson might have ended up in prison given all the scandals that were catching up with him.
@Mist001
They can hardly avoid complying. Washington applies the carrot and the stick.
The stick: a quiet conversation – or maybe an anonymous letter or phone call – asking whether you want what the Kennedys got.
The carrot: How do you think virtually every single senior minister in recent years has retired as a multi-millionaire? Not many people have the guts to talk about such matters in public, but Paul Craig Roberts is one. To my knowledge, no one has sued him – or even threatened to – in the several years since he said these words at a public conference in Delphi:
“My Ph.D. dissertation chairman, who became a high Pentagon official assigned to wind down the Vietnam war, in answer to my question about how Washington gets Europeans to always do what Washington wants replied: “Money, we give them money.” “Foreign aid?” I asked. “No, we give the European political leaders bagfuls of money. They are for sale. We bought them. They report to us.” Perhaps this explains Tony Blair’s $50 million fortune one year out of office”.
– Paul Craig Roberts https://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-conquest-of-western-europe-is-europe-doomed-by-vassalage-to-washington/5538471
@ Tom Welsh September 26, 2019 at 17:09
‘…“My Ph.D. dissertation chairman, who became a high Pentagon official assigned to wind down the Vietnam war, in answer to my question about how Washington gets Europeans to always do what Washington wants replied: “Money, we give them money.” “Foreign aid?” I asked. “No, we give the European political leaders bagfuls of money. They are for sale. We bought them. They report to us.” Perhaps this explains Tony Blair’s $50 million fortune one year out of office”…’
‘Bigger fleas have littler fleas upon their backs to bite them’ – Saudi, Israeli, South Korean and others now return the complement in the US and elsewhere. It’s very cost-efficient.
Tony Blair should be dragged into Parliament to be made to explain how he came by his fortune.
‘The media appear not to have noticed the existence of the Common Foreign Policy.’
I think this is because the UK media have long believed, or wanted to believe, that the EU played only a minimal role in our life. This has proven to be nonsense, and the well-propagated problems of a no-deal exit from the EU prove that the EU has considerable power over a variety of fields that affect people in the UK.
However, for supporters of no-deal, this reality causes them a problem, as the obvious truth of our EU entanglement and the width and depth of their power is that a no-deal Brexit would have huge ramifications, and that a slow and carefully considered exit is the only one that could be successful.
Actually the British media have wanted their respective audiences to believe that the EU has played an exclusively malign role in their lives. The rare exceptions were lukewarm and ill-informed about what was actually our relationship.
@ Giambologna September 25, 2019 at 10:39
‘..I think this is because the UK media have long believed, or wanted to believe, that the EU played only a minimal role in our life…’
Hardly, far more likely that is something they do not wish the public to know, so they ignore it, like so much more that is inconvenient to their owners, ‘Security Services’ ‘advisers’ and their ‘Elite Puppetmasters’.
If Johnson goes full NeoCon, evidently he won’t be doing much different from Blair with Bush. In any case, going full Trump (slightly different) doesn’t mean war with Iran. Trump has shown many signs that he’s not going to go ahead with an attack on Iran. No doubt the military advice is discouraging, but that can only add to a personal hesitation.
The funny thing about going along with Trump’s Jerusalem embassy policy is that the Consulate-General which would be upgraded is located in a middle-class Palestinian East Jerusalem suburb, and thus might end up seeming more like an embassy to Palestine than to Israel. I’m not sure Johnson would like to give that impression, but doing anything else would cost a vast amount.
EU foreign policy is DEFINITELY neo-con – only days ago France and Germany joined Boris and the fairy story that Iran bombed the Saudi oilfields, whereas it was very probably a Mossad false flag operation
Walter Cairns
The entire Middle East is a Mossad false flag operation. Saudi Arabia was warned in advance about the Mossad false flag operation that killed 270 and injured 500 more in Sri Lanka, later claimed by Mossad’s false flag operation Islamic State. They put the Saudi embassy in Sri Lanka under curfew.
The electronic hardware installed in Saudi Arabia is probably flashy looking junk off an old Star Wars set,
The actual doings pre-arranged and planned from a rival emiracy in Bahrain.
Do I believe that rogue elements in the Yemeni Houthi army could attack a major Saudi oil installation?
If that had happened they would already be soup by now. For all the utter bollocks spewed by the NATO slaves Trump and Johnson, the US backs the Houthis against Saudi and Sunni interests just as it backs Islamic State and sister Al Qaida against Iranian and Shi’a interests. These little pawns in their dyed beards and military uniforms are not going to step out of line from their neo-con masters and lose a pay packet.
Nor are the friends of Mossad in the UK parliament going to miss a pay packet by speaking out of line.
Interestingly, Macron and Merkel justified siding with the neoliberalcon “Iran did it” narrative on grounds of ..”highly likely”..
now that’s a surprise!
By the way, how is Yulia Skripal doing?
@wonky
“By the way, how is Yulia Skripal doing?”
Still dead, I imagine.
@ wonky September 25, 2019 at 12:46
‘..Interestingly, Macron and Merkel justified siding with the neoliberalcon “Iran did it” narrative on grounds of ..”highly likely”….’
Surely a mistake in the translation? What they probably meant (if they were telling the truth) was ‘..highly convenient…’, like ‘Assad’s’ CW’s
I read somewhere that the routing of the British by the Japanese at Singapore signalled the end of the British forces as a world power in battle.
As for Johnson, he recently said that the NHS wasn’t on the table in a trade deal with the USA, knowing what a barefaced liar he is, we can safely assume that it is.
Basically after Singapore the British army on its own did not win a battle or war until the Falklands and that was pretty much a score draw. That the Argentinians just strolled in and took over was a huge embarrassment.
Even with the Falklands we needed US cover and intelligence/oversight help. The UK could not mount such an operation today. We don’t have the ships, the carriers have no planes or the long range aircraft deployment.
During the Falklands the carrier group had to stay so far SE of the islands to keep them safe from exocets and Argentine jets that the Harriers had only minutes over the Islands before having to return to refuel meaning they never established air superiority until the airfield was retaken and repaired.
The army has also been gutted. Regiments and battalions disbanded and recruitment is so bad they are only around 70-75% manned. They’re relying too much on Territorials lots of whom got rotated through Afghanistan due to not enough regulars and numbers have dropped more since.
Four distinct Scottish regiments are now individual named battalions in the single Royal Regiment of Scotland. The individual battalions had to be fought for as recruitment would have fallen off a cliff. Here in Dundee is Black Watch country. Take away the chance to be Black Watch and lots of youngsters wouldn’t bother.
And note a lot of the troops in Singapore were Australian or Indian. In Australia ‘Gordon Bennett’ is an expletive. General Gordon Bennett was officer commanding the Australian forces in Singapore. As the situation deteriorated he decided he was too important to become a POW and flew out on the last plane.
When he arrived back in Australia he was given non jobs and drifted into obscurity. A lot of the Indian troops there formed the nucleus of the INLA and fought with the Japanese in Burma to try and liberate India from Britain. The Indian govt gave them war pensions just like the Kenyans give Mau Mau veterans war pensions.
If you recall back before 9/11 we were allowed the Freedom Fighter vs Terrorist distinction.
Thank you MuscleGuy for the info.
I’d like to add on a humorous note that the exasperated saying of Gordon Bennett!!!! When someone is angry or suprised. Comes from a rich businessman with that moniker who would often pull the tablecloths from diners in expensive restaurants in the US, whilst they were dining.
More often than not thought, the diners would end up covered in their expensive repasts and libations.
Other sources say it was on a boat, and that “his abandoned countrymen nicknamed their running shoes Gordon Bennets”.
I think Iain there are several possible versions out there. I found mine in Bill Bryson’s book, Made in America.
Or could it have anything to do with the Gordon Bennett Cup, for which motor cars raced in their national colours for the first time. Which is why “British racing green” was invented — since red, white and blue had already been picked by the USA, Germany and France (quicker off the mark) — as you probably know.
Version I read had Bennett joining up with a group of Royal Engineers (REs) who spotted a sampan in Singapore harbour but the only way to get to it was in a small rowing boat that wasn’t big enough to hold all of them. Bennett was rowed out to the sampan on the first trip whereupon he urged the REs to set sail and abandon their mates waiting on the quayside. Understandably they refused and returned for their mates.
I’ll have to dig the book out again but I think the REs and Bennett got separated and the REs ended up as PoWs so this story, and others, didn’t get known until after the war and Bennett’s reputation was trashed.
The British General Percival was made scapegoat for the fall of Singapore and whilst he made some serious errors he was not adequately supplied. The Japanese had 200-300 tanks; the British had none and precious few anti-tank weapons, the RAF were pitting a handful of Brewster Buffalos (one of the worst fighters of WW2) against Zeros and most of the Australian and New Zealand troops hadn’t even been taught how to use their rifles. In the end the British had to surrender because they simply ran out of ammunition.
Yes I’m sure the Japanese would’ve made better masters of India than the British and not carried off any Indian women to be sex slaves or conducted chemical warfare experiments, involving vivisection, on the peasantry as they did in China.
Re Falklands and Britain’s ability to ‘fight alone’.
There is evidence of a Polaris submarine in the South Atlantic.
Faced with the risk of the British doing something very stupid if they didn’t win, Americans suddenly became a lot less ‘neutral’ and some very useful intelligence and equipment suddenly became available.
I’m certain that Polaris could launch a nuclear strike completely independent of the USA
I doubt if the USA repeated that mistake when setting upTrident.
General Alexander Haig: “That woman (Thatcher) wants a war”
is a quote that I seem to remember from that time.
@ Douglas September 25, 2019 at 16:31
It was a hardly-concealed ‘secret’, and the same sub (‘Conqueror’, I believe) paid a ‘courtesy visit’ to Gibraltar at the end of the Gibraltar Inquest of the three IRA members murdered by the SAS in cold blood.
The British army has never won any war on its own, they have always recruited empire and commonwealth troops.
@William Purves
How then did the British conquer their empire in the first place?
@ Tom Welsh September 26, 2019 at 17:18
Divide and rule. There were always traitors whom they could, and did, recruit.
@Muscleguy
I am horrified at what has been done to “the ladies from Hell”, as some German soldiers called the Scots in WW1.
A decent-sized army could easily be maintained merely by reducing slightly the vast amounts that politicians and civil servants lavish on their own comfort.
Getting rid of the “nuclear deterrent” would save a few hundred billion, some of which could be spent on having small but world-class conventional armed forces. (All we need to defend the UK). We should take a leaf out of the Russian, Chinese and Iranian books by aiming only for self-defence.
The presence on British soil of a single nuclear weapon – British or American – accomplishes absolutely nothing but to ensure that every single person in these islands would be killed in any nuclear exchange. The Russians and the Chinese have far, far more warheads than they need for deterrence – they would have plenty to spare for us, just to mak siccar.
@ Tom Welsh September 26, 2019 at 17:17
The British ‘Elite’ are still aiming for an Anglo-American world empire, just as they were when they planned WWI.
Dominic Raab to give “Iran update” to the HoC today. I won’t prejudge.
WTF is happening in Washington? The Senate has voted unanimously for the acting Inspector General to release the whistleblowers complaint to the relevant committees. Unanimously, even the reliable Trump sycophants. Fox “News” looks like it is contemplating throwing Trump under the bus.
All on the basis of fevered speculation about the content of the Ukrainian conversations. Seriously, imagine being a translator tasked with rendering Trump’s word salad into lucid sentences in Ukrainian.
Perhaps we will get caretaker PM Margaret Becket and they’ll get caretaker President Mike Pence.
The Republicans though want to weaponise this against the Biden son in Ukraine thing though which is why many voted for it. Though the evidence for that looks much thinner to non existent vs this one.
biden bragged that he spoke more to poroshitko than to his own wife.
neocon yank nuland stated that the usg had spent (at least) $5 billion on ukraine on 2 yank color revolutions, and that amount of money goes MUCH further than it would in the USA. If the cursed warmongering usg had not been involved in ukraine to cause problems for Russia while raping ukraine, causing massive poverty, death and destruction, and using ukrainians as cannon fodder against the Donbass Defenders then I would never have become interested in the 2 new republics there; the people there are friendly and normal.
Evidently, snr did get jnr help with burisma.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Foreign_and_Security_Policy Chapter and verse. It grew like Topsy.
Israel is not shown as a EU member although it has been installed/installed itself into Eurovision.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_state_of_the_European_Union#/media/File:Member_States_of_the_European_Union_(polar_stereographic_projection)_EN.svg
It has also installed itself into the EU trade commissions, it has special dispebnsation when it comes to selling its wares in Europe, despite acting like a rogue regime.
“Israel is not shown as a EU member …”
That’s because it is the boss.
“The media appear not to have noticed the existence of the Common Foreign Policy.”
It may not just be the media because in many ways the EU has not shown a solid foreign policy on many issues. It appears that the foreign policy of the EU is dictated by NATO which is the real decision maker in this case.
Reading about the CFP, I thought it was based mainly on the UN Charter, The Helsinki Final Act and The Paris Charter.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Foreign_and_Security_Policy
The only time the media noticed the EU foreign policy – as far as I remember anyway – what when Catherine Ashton was made its High Representative. She was much mocked, as was the role, and the general consensus from the EU-haters was that this was merely more evidence of the EU’s desire to become a super-state, gobbling up its own members’ sovereignty, etc. etc.
Business resumes in the HoC. Bercow is adamant that parliament was not prorogued, but adjourned and asked for the record for September 9th to be amended accordingly. Is he having a laugh?
Joanna Cherry asks the Attorney General (the mega wealthy Geoffrey Cox QC MP) about the prorogation document. Cox boomed out his responses.
The Solicitor General, Michael Ellis, sits alongside. He is a Conservative Friend of Israel incidentally.
Channels 231 and 232 are broadcasting the stuff.
This is the record:
mmons Chamber
▲
House of Commons
Prayers
Oral Answers to Questions
View all Oral Answers to Questions
Education
Speaker’s Statement
Points of Order
Prorogation (Disclosure of Communications)
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019 (Rule of Law)
Prorogation (Disclosure of Communications)
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019 (Rule of Law)
Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019 Section 3(2)
Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal) Bill
Points of Order
Early Parliamentary General Election (No. 2)
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners
Her Majesty’s Most Gracious Speech
Prorogation
The latter reads at present –
Prorogation
09 September 2019
Volume 664
Mr Speaker –
The Commission was also for proroguing this present Parliament, and the Lord President said:
“My Lords and Members of the House of Commons:
By virtue of Her Majesty’s Commission which has now been read, we do, in Her Majesty’s name, and in obedience to Her Majesty’s Commands, prorogue this Parliament to Monday the fourteenth day of this October to be then here holden, and this Parliament is accordingly prorogued to Monday the fourteenth day of October.”
End of the First Session (opened on 13 June 2017) of the Fifty-Seventh Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the Sixty-Eighth Year of the Reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-09-09/debates/C555956D-61A5-46D7-9ACB-E5FE1479C441/Prorogation
Orwell lives.
That’s what annulment means, @SharpEars – if an action is annulled (“voided”) it’s as if it never happened. Bercow isn’t having a laugh.
I’m watching the proceedings too. It’s remarkable that the Opposition aren’t wiping the floor with Geoffrey Cox.
1) Cox says the Parliament is dead.
The right answer is obvious! No, Parliament is not dead; the GOVERNMENT is dead. Resign from office! (Add in a comment about the Tory party if desired.)
2) Cox says the Opposition should have a VONC and should support a one-line bill fixing an election date.
The answer is obvious. It’s in two parts.
a) Anyone in a job that involves responsibility for other people who expresses no confidence in themselves and yet still wants to stay in the job is acting in a ridiculous fashion when there are others who would have confidence in their own abilities. Resign!
b) Sure, lets fix a date. Let’s have a general election on Thursday 10 October, so that a competent government can be put in office and can send its leader to the EU Council meeting the following week.
Note: Parliament has the right to repeal both the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (regarding early general elections) and the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 (regarding the 25 day period). An election on 10 October is PERFECTLY FEASIBLE, and if the will is there then an Act can become law within a few hours.
3) What about the Commons’ passing of the motion entitled “Prorogation (Disclosure of Communications)” on 9 September? The government should hand over the documents right now or the Opposition will seek a court injunction requiring them to hand them over, breach of which would mean jail time.
The government is weak on 3).
C’mon Jeremy, FFS, seize the initiative!
I also kinda wish Jeremy would seize the initiative.
Reluctantly, though, I think he’s right: he’s against fighting a GE on Brexit. That would split Labour, and he’d lose.
Get Brexit out of the way first, then fight a GE. I’m pretty sure he’d still lose it, but he wouldn’t split Labour so badly.
I can see your point, @Jimmeh.
But how do they get Brexit out of the way first? It won’t be good for Labour if as midnight approaches on 31 October they are forced to choose between No Deal and Revoke. Revoke without a referendum and the Labour party could be dead.
When the Tories offer Labour a hoop and say “jump through it”, Corbyn must be able to grab it from them and say “YOU jump through it”. He has got to go in for the kill somehow or other before the end of next month.
Rumour is being spread that there is smoking gun evidence against Boris Johnson in the Jennifer Arcuri and Hacker House case…
Do we assume Jennifer Arcuri is an intelligence asset? …. and for which state?
“3) What about the Commons’ passing of the motion entitled “Prorogation (Disclosure of Communications)” on 9 September? The government should hand over the documents right now or the Opposition will seek a court injunction requiring them to hand them over, breach of which would mean jail time.”
Good news: Keir Starmer has just raised this in the House!
Keep twisting the knife, Keir. Demand that they publish all the documents the Commons decided they must publish, and that they must do it now.
He’s now rambling about it. Someone should teach him how to focus.
Regardless of the technicalities, Iranians are not known for their “hit and run” attacks, they always own up square to any of their deeds. Recollecting that; it was Iran that first announced they had downed an American drone. It was Iran that announced that they had boarded the tanker and diverted it to one of their ports. It was Iran that announced they had captured the super duper stealth drone RQ-170 that was met by derision and incredulity of the Western media and the social media trolls for weeks and months.
The racist notion of underhanded wily johnny foreigner is the hook that seems to be used by the Western media and leaders to explain away their misdeeds and ill intent.
Fact is al saud pederasts know damn fine well that they have spent billions on hardware that is neither use nor ornament; the rag tag Huthi have been pummelling the al saud in their own fiefdom by increasingly deadly and accurate attacks, most of which have been covered up and kept out of the news, this latest attack could not be covered up by any means hence the narrative that we witness. For the bell boy Johnson to join in, it makes it all the more bizarre.
Although few Westerners seem to understand this, Iran is dealing from a position of strength, not weakness.
All the fabled military and naval assets of the West shrink immensely in value when they have to be applied against Iran. That nation’s North and East borders are safely protected by friendly and neutral countries. The only potential exception is Afghanistan, and if the Yanks tried to launch an offensive against Iran from there… well, you can just imagine how happy that would make the Iranians and the Afghans. Such huge military columns and bases to attack! Such vast ammunition dumps to touch off!
So the only possible attack direction would be the South coast and the Gulf. Given that Iran not only has a modern army over a million strong, but literally thousands of state-of-the-art missiles of all kinds, that would be suicide. The Iranians have publicly stated that, contrary to the apparent belief of some Western governments, their missiles have a range of at least 2,000 km (1,250 miles). That means they can not only wipe out all American ships and bases in the Middle East; they can also sink their ships long before they get anywhere near the Gulf.
The Iranians also have very strong air defence systems. And, should Western forces threaten to conquer Iran or cause excessive damage, who knows when Russia and China might not take a hand? In that event, all Western assets within several thousand miles of any part of Asia would be at risk.
Even if Trump was susceptible to brown nosing, Britain would receive the same reward it has always got for brown nosing the US.
Nothing.
Nothing? Surely the sense of over inflated self importance that UK Prime ministers get from being America’s Number one poodle that “can punch above it’s weight” is reward enough. If not just look at Tony Blair’s assets. I’m sure Johnson has.
There is that, yes. A powerful source of pride.
“There is that, yes. A powerful source of pride”.
For any dung beetle.
Blair always looked like a safe pair of hands. Johnson never has.
The operative words are “looked like”. Blair is a consummate actor, and absolutely nothing else.
For a proper analysis of Saudi’s defence systems I would recommend MoonofAlabama’s brilliant website
“That any substantial number of cruise missiles were launched from Iran into Saudi Arabia and none of them were picked up by the defences of the numerous warships in the Gulf, by the US military bases or by the Saudi air defences is so improbable as to be utter nonsense.”
You forgot to mention there is no satellite telemetry either, not even from KH-11 Evolved Enhanced CRYSTAL showing set up of missiles or aftermath of launch, given the vast array of satellite data they have they must have evidence of the attack origin, therefore the attack could not have come from Iran which means either it was from Yemen, or it was a false flag from within KSA to start a war with Iran.
“…or it was a false flag from within KSA to start a war with Iran”.
Only a complete lunatic would try that. As I pointed out in a recent comment, the Iranian attitude is essentially, “Make my day”.
For anyone short of the USA and Israel to attack Iran would be suicide.
For the USA to do it would be political suicide.
Well listening to the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox, he’s appears to have the measure of the House of Commons. His theatrical antics and legalese, has in my opinion somewhat neutralised the just questions on prorogation of the House.
He certainly put that whippersnapper Ian Murray in his place.
he is fighting for his own life, it was his decision that the unanimous vote of the judges overturned, his advice was wrong.
Indeed that is true, and some MP’s have held him to account on that particular matter, however, Cox claims that advice he (The Government) received on prorogation seemed perfectly plausible at the time. How can you be held accountable if the advice at the time appears perfectly legitimate.
I’m not defending Cox, I’m merely stating that there doesnt appear yet to be anyone skilled enough in the House at the moment to expose Cox’s position as other than, an error on advice received.
They can’t even hold him (The government) to account the costs of the prorogation, because the figures aren’t available yet according to Cox that is.
Cox’s mastery in the House exposes the lack of abilities of the MP’s questioning him in my opinion.
“How can you be held accountable if the advice at the time appears perfectly legitimate?”
Aka, the Antony Charles Lynton Blair escape hatch.
Convincing to many.
It was ok on the day I tested it is the get out clause in many professions.
Sacking a former Attorney General by a Tory PM might happen again if Cox drops a catch.
Why didn’t the 11 in the winning team call foul about Cox’s wrong advice to the PM?
Because the sacking of Dominic Grieve came from the office of no 10, not from him.
I’d imagine with regards to Cox and the government it is down to legalities.
The Supreme court found no impropriety on the governments behalf. As with Blair I’m in no way saying what they attempted was right (Blair is a nasty piece of work) but again, with Cox, its the legalities of prorogation that really matter.
No, the exact opposite… Blair was told his war was illegal by his Attorney General.
Also in this case nobody is dead yet.
Cox also is hiding behind the Law associations rules by not making his advice to prorogue Parliament, given to the PM and his unelected sidekick Cummings, public, he’s cagey about what he said because he’s been overruled.
Yes Nevermind hiding behind privilege which I think protects all communications between a professional legal adviser and his client.
It “seems perfectly legitimate” to blow away burglars in your home with a shotgun; but in fact it’s murder.
And it’s not your legal advisers that decide what the law is; you find out what the law is only when you are up before the judge. Cox got bad advice, and wasn’t smart enough to realise that. He advised Bojo, and Bojo advised the Queen. The judgement of the supremes is that they were all wrong; so they were all wrong.
Yes but here’s the thing, no punishment has or can be a portioned for receiving bad advice. Johnson and Co almost pulled the prorogation of parliament off, specificalky to waste time over Brexit, and it looks like he’ll not even get a slap on the wrist.
One wonders if the government and its advisors knew that all along but hoped the courts would come down in their favour and demonise the judiciary in the process.
Maybe the courts foresaw this as well, and countered Johnson.
‘It “seems perfectly legitimate” to blow away burglars in your home with a shotgun; but in fact it’s murder’.
Which goes to show, if there were any lingering doubt, that the law and the so-called “justice system” are not there to protect us, but to put anyone who kills or robs us in prison for a few years so that they can hone trheir techniques in informal seminars with others of their kind.
As to our being killed or robbed, that’s just tough luck.
The idea being hinted at with regards to the drone attacks, hinted at but never actually spelled out because doing so would be ridiculously problematic, is that by supplying the Houthis with drones, Iran itself is directly responsible for the attacks.
I’m sure I don’t need to explain to anyone like Craig Murray that this goes against the grain of about 100 years of proxy war rules. Indeed, if we were to apply that logic, the US would be a legitimate target for Palestinians, Syrians, Iraqis, Libyans and many others around the world on the basis that American supplied weapons have been used against those countries.
I’d happily support such a move as far as international law is concerned. I’d be happy to see arms manufacturers and suppliers held to account on that basis, as well as national governments. If you supply a gun to someone and that gun is used for murder, then, yes, you are at least partly responsible.
But that’s a moral stance and international law is devoid of morality for a reason — it suits the west to operate immorally in the world.
This drone attack issue is another example of western hypocrisy, another attempt to rig the deck and have it both ways. Iran is playing by the rules when it supplies drones and arms to the Houthis, the same rules that we play by when it suits us to depose some government in the third world, and that’s the problem.
Looking at the bigger picture, I don’t think we are far away from another chapter of direct colonial rule in the world. Chiselling away at the rules of proxy war and international relations is a step squarely in the direction of imperialism and ‘might is right’.
There’s an admission in all this that the neo-colonial post-war system (under US tutelage) is unravelling before our eyes; people are wise to the puppet-government games and see through the charades we call democracy. All the west has is might. The US and what we call democracy couldn’t be more discredited in the wider world than it is today; in both cases synonymous with corruption, terroristic violence, repression, impoverishment, and hypocrisy.
Direct colonial rule would probably be less obnoxious.
“Indeed, if we were to apply that logic, the US would be a legitimate target for Palestinians, Syrians, Iraqis, Libyans and many others around the world on the basis that American supplied weapons have been used against those countries”.
Probably about half the nations in the UN – if not more. And the butcher’s bill would add up millions.
Apologies – “probably about half the nations in the UN”.
I am appalled at the continuous law breaking by our PM, who seems to be seeking the flight into war to get himself out of this hole. By announcing that the UK, not in my name, is joining America to cancel the Iran nuclear agreement, after an alleged false flag attack on Saudi oil facilities, designed to reverse the drop in oil prices and set the middle east alight.
Will our desperate PM , via his fireplace salesman replacement, send troops to Saudi Arabia to join the extra 500 US soldiers?
Trumps withdrawal from the JCPOA had nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear ambitions, entirely peaceful and legal as they were and are now. Rather they have everything to do with its legal and mainly home grown missile systems which over the years have the capability to be highly accurate and therefore a threat to Saudi Arabia and Israel, that cannot be allowed, hence that is part of the demand that these missiles should be negotiated away at the behest of Israel, which the US is trying to do through direct and secondary sanctions [both of which are in breach of International law] supported now by vassals UK, France and Germany. The only reply a self respecting nation can give to the US, UK, France and Germany is GFY.
seconded Harry. But France and Germany will not take part in this oily mud wrestling.
who has seen radar/satellite footage of the attack on Saudi oil; installations? to say none are available is utter BS as it is one of the most viewed regions of our rapidly disintegrating, once beautiful, world.
Liz Truss should be arrested for breaching the arms deal agreement, for fuelling destabilisation and war in Yemen and Saudi Arabia, actions like hers are what gives false flaggers the security they need. Look, she is still selling us arms,,,,,
Hi nevermind
Re satellite footage.. As Moony at 12;22 says.. MoA is a great site.. There are some good Satellite Images, and a wealth of info / links here –
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/damage-at-saudi-oil-plant-points-to-well-targeted-swarm-attack.html?
“Trumps withdrawal from the JCPOA had nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear ambitions… [r]ather they have everything to do with its legal and mainly home grown missile systems”
I disagree. Iran is being targeted because it is exporting crude and not using the petrodollar. This is the same reason that Venezuela has been targeted, and that is what done for Saddam and Qaddafi.
“The only reply a self respecting nation can give to the US, UK, France and Germany is GFY”.
Which is exactly what the Iranians have been saying (very politely) for some months now. They can afford to do so because of their missiles!
Suppose Houthis got hold of drones and attached bombs to them. From where could they best launch them? They couldn’t have safely travelled many hiundreds of miles North by land into enemy territory through a war zone. More likely they went by boat to Iran and launched the drones from there. So Iran may well have connived at the operation and helped it, even if the Houthis pushed the buttons.
More likely they went by boat to Iran and launched the drones from there. So Iran may well have connived at the operation and helped it, even if the Houthis pushed the buttons.
More likely does not help, it confuses minds and causes more false news/flag attacks. Nobody should cause harm by the millions to innocent civilians on the back of some economically grounded false flag attack.
There’s exactly zero evidence to support the argument that they were launched from Iran. None.
“…they [Houthi] went by boat to Iran and launched the drones from there.” = Piffle. I’ve read plenty of ridiculous versions of the attacks on Aramco, but this one takes the cake.
To do this, they would be sailing 1,000+ miles, through the Straits of Hormuz, into the Persian Gulf, which are rather heavily monitored waters. And then, anything launched from the Persian Gulf would be flying past US & UK bases in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and KSA which have these new-fangled devices called “radar”.
There are simpler – and therefore much more likely – options for launching the (purported) drones: (1), just drive some Technicals through the Empty Quarter from Yemen; or (2) infiltrate KSA, set up cells, have them launch.
Iran’s responsibility in the Aramco attacks is somewhat less than US responsibility for KSA bombing Yemen. USA is openly selling the planes & bombs to KSA, whereas Iran at least maintains the fig-leaf of covert rather than overt support for the Houthis.
I’m rooting for a quick end to the House of Saud, may they rot in whatever version of Hell springs from the fever-dreams of the Wahabi sect they (KSA) have spread around the world.
The straits of Hormuz would be friendly territory for them, since they would be welcomed by Iranian allies, as surely as they were the opposite for Westerners. How would driving 1000km into Saudi territory be easier?
M.J
In case you have not noticed, the straits of Hurmuz have two sides, one is the Iranian side and the other is the UAE. I do not know why you are persevering with this gibberish?
You just answered your own question. You don’t suppose that the Houthis would approach the Strat via the UAE side, do you?
“They couldn’t have safely travelled many hiundreds of miles North by land into enemy territory through a war zone. ”
That’s quite untrue. The Saudi-Yemeni border is open and anyone can drive across it, as the Saudis don’t defend it very much. There’ve been many Houthi videos on YouTube taken within Saudi, just to demonstrate the point. There was no problem just to load the drones on the back of a pickup, cover them with a tarpaulin in case of questions, with a driver who can look and behave local (a good part of Yemen was conquered by Ibn Saud and is now incorporated into SA). There are lots in Najran. Drive north to meet up with dissident Shi’a refinery workers from Abqaiq, launch with guidance from people who know what they are doing, and you’ve easily got a devastating hit. I’m not saying that was precisely what was done, but it’s a scenario involving very little investment but which could have produced the effects seen.
Indeed, that seems “highly likely”. 😎
Referendums are democracy, Parliament is a republican form of government. Scottish Independence referendum lost. Remain in the EU lost. Get over it, you’re sounding like ‘russiagaters’.
referenda are democracy? bald claim that.
only if all those who want to take part, are able to do so. If you have referenda, were the outcome affects the whole country, that leaves millions to suffer the consequences without having a say, then that is not democratic.
Don’t worry, soon to be par5, if I get my way you will have a democratic fair and proportional means to elect your reps, as yet you never had a democracy,imho.
China and Iran are doing deals the West refuse, this together with the belt and road initiative will benefit both parties for the foreseeable future, remember how the French cancelled their large share in the development of the North Pars field in Iran at the behest of the US, also the newly installed US Ambassador to Germany told the Germans to stop any investments in Iran..NOW. He also told German companies [over the heads of the German government] to stop the Nord Stream 2 pipe line from Russia or face sanctions, what arrogance, still if they think they can get away with it [and they can with many vassals], why not?
“The central pillar of the new deal is that China will invest $280bn developing Iran’s oil, gas and petrochemicals sectors. This amount may be front-loaded into the first five-year period of the deal but the understanding is that further amounts will be available in every subsequent five-year period, subject to both parties’ agreement.
There will be another $120bn investment in upgrading Iran’s transport and manufacturing infrastructure, which again can be front-loaded into the first five-year period and added to in each subsequent period should both parties agree.
“China will also be able to buy any and all oil, gas and petchems products at a minimum guaranteed discount of 12pc to the six-month rolling mean price of comparable benchmark products, plus another 6pc to 8pc of that metric for risk-adjusted compensation.” https://www.petroleum-economist.com/articles/politics-economics/middle-east/2019/china-and-iran-flesh-out-strategic-partnership
Would it be possible to have a Petition for Blowhard Johnson’s Public Execution, at the Tower of London, say? All money raised from ticket sales could be given over to a Conservative good cause…. if there is such a thing!
No. That would illegal and wrong. Are you trying to bait people into saying illegal things?
Defamation, libel and incitement to commit a crime could be construed as “saying illegal things” but there is no such definition (yet) on the statute books that determines what things are legal to say and those which aren’t. The term “hate speech” is often chucked about in the media but there is no such thing in a legal context.
That might set the regrettable precedent that the UK executes only those leaders who do not start wars and kill millions of foreigners.
The big fear with Iran is that they will develop the means to defend themselves and deter us. It’s possible that horse has bolted already. That Iranian drones can defy Saudi radar and defences is a game changing prospect.
It’s worth pointing out that the thing that makes a drone a drone and not a missile is that it can be controlled remotely. Missile targeting is pre-determined where drones can be guided live and it’s this control that makes them so deadly — pilots can assess situations and respond to changing contexts and events on the go.
I am pretty sure Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons as yet but I’d be surprised if they couldn’t cobble together a highly destructive radioactive dirty bomb of some sort. As I understand the uranium refinement process, there are stages involved and most school chemistry labs could reach the stage necessary to make dirty bombs relatively quickly.
Another deterrent, of course, would be an aggressive response to an attack on Iran by Russian and/or China. When you look at trade relations and the deterioration of diplomacy here, it wouldn’t be too insane to suggest that the US and UK seem to want a war with Russia and/or China.
This will escalate, I believe, and massively. I said that within minutes of seeing the news of the drone attacks in Saudi Arabia. And I predicted that a slow build-up of pressure rather than a knee jerk reaction would probably be the most ominous sign that they are going to really hammer Iran over this.
“It’s worth pointing out that the thing that makes a drone a drone and not a missile is that it can be controlled remotely. Missile targeting is pre-determined where drones can be guided live…”
That turns out not to be the case.
Many missiles can be guided remotely. For instance the omnipresent TOW wire-guided anti-tank missiles. That’s why they wobble about so much – the controller’s hand shakes.
If you watched “Top Gun”, you will remember the F14 Tomcat jet fighter – considered by many to have upstaged Tom Cruise as the film’s real hero. Introduced into service in 1974 – 45 years ago – it carried the AIM-54 Phoenix, a long-range missile that could be actively guided by the F14’s crew.
That’s really why the (now rarely used) term “guided missile” came into use.
In principle it is nearly impossible to distinguish between drones and missiles. Today virtually all missiles have rocket motors, whereas most drones use propellers and are therefore very much slower, but with much greater endurance. Eventually the two types will converge.
I have been out this afternoon and went to Hansard to see what Johnson had said in the HoC. There was much advance publicity given to his speech on return from the US.
I see no trace of him. https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-09-25
Currently Gove is holding forth on Brexit Readiness.
This is O/T but note a DCMS PUS was put up to answer this question about government money, ie the taxpayers’ money, to Hacker House, but ostensibly about Johnson’s friendship fling with a Ms Arcuri.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-09-25/debates/A3805401-8839-4C36-A25D-51D0E9FEEBCA/HackerHouse
Even on the BBC website as well as in the tabloids.
Jennifer Arcuri: Boris Johnson given 14 days to explain businesswoman links
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49819686
Better late than never Boris.
‘Brexit: defiant Boris Johnson challenges Labour to table vote of no confidence – live news
Prime minister says supreme court judges were wrong as Corbyn tells him to get a Brexit extension to secure an election in angry Commons exchange
MPs trying to force PM to seek Brexit extension earlier
Full story: Corbyn tells PM to apologise to Queen and country
Johnson accused of seeking ‘no man’s land’ at Irish border
What happens next in parliament?’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/sep/25/boris-johnson-flies-to-uk-as-parliament-returns-after-court-ruling-politics-live
19.06 BST
The ‘West’ cannot afford a war with Iran, not only is Iran capable of stopping all oil transiting the strait of Hormus, it is the main country in the ‘arc of resistance’ including Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen and Gaza. Hezbollah alone claim to be able to reach every part of Israel with their accurate missiles, in theory their 120,000 missiles could lay waste to the main industrial and populated areas of Metropolitan Tel Aviv, not forgetting their ports and vulnerable gas rigs and refineries. The Satraps on the other side of the Gulf would be in a worse state, all their oil facilities would be destroyed, their populations composed mainly of ex pats and other guest workers would flee alongside the Princes and other riff raff unable to pay their citizens and unable to head chop everybody. The Shia in east Saudi Arabia would likely revolt and help drive the US out altogether. Of course were this to happen the World economy would take a huge hit and cause a world wide depression, the US dollar as reserve currency could falter since it is dependent on oil sales being conducted in dollars. In conclusion the US has too much to lose including their vulnerable bases and exposed war ships, so in my opinion there will be no war, sorry the US is already waging war [economic] to which the US hope and expect will result in thousands of deaths of Iranians, the US could care less, in the words of US Sec of State Albright when asked whether the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children caused by US sanctions was worth it, replied “yes”.
Most informed observers would agree that direct military conflict with Iran would be the act of a madman, but you have hit the nail on the head with this comment “the US dollar as reserve currency could falter since it is dependent on oil sales being conducted in dollars”. Iran is currently exporting oil and is not using the dollar, so it is already threatening the US dollar as reserve currency. This is also the case with Venezuela, and it was the case with Iraq and Libya. Any country that exports oil outside the petrodollar is a threat to the dollar and therefore US dominance.
“Iran is currently exporting oil and is not using the dollar, so it is already threatening the US dollar as reserve currency”.
Exactly. And as Russia and China have its back, it looks like being the first nation to do so with impunity. No doubt others will soon join it.
“Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever.”
Is Bellingcat really a warmongering propaganda operation? Prompted by Craig’s anathema, I found one of their recent articles confirming Saudi Arabia’s deliberate attacks on the civilian population of Yemen, and that Bellingcat is also participating in the “French arms” revelations of the catastrophic naval blocade. Does anyone know why Bellingcat should be amongst Craig’s hundreds of adversaries?
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2019/09/02/attacks-causing-grave-civilian-harm
https://disclose.ngo/en/article/french-made-ships-are-enforcing-blockade-starving-millions-yemeni-civilians
Iain
Interesting point. But I think Craig’s point relates to previous investigations regarding the Salisbury poisoning, the alleged Syria CW attacks and MH 17 in which Bellingcat played an extensive role in disinformation. As to Yemen, even the dogs in the street know how complicit the US and UK are in the war against Yemen and are known to supply weapons and advisors to operate these weapon systems, it is really not a secret. Therefore for Bellingcat to produce this rather thin on the ground expose of what we already know is by way of whitewashing Bellingcat: see I also spill the beans on our governments who sponsor me.
As far as Salisbury, Syria and MH17 are concerned Bellingcat did a good job of countering the disinformation mainly coming out of Putin’s propaganda machine. A very good job which is the reason they’re so disliked by some.
Hilarious.
Actually, the articles I mentioned refer to Saudi Arabia and France, so I don’t understand your comment.
Could the source of Craig’s animosity also be that Bellingcat’s investigative journalists (who seem generally to do serious work judging by my quick look around) gave prominence at the time to his somewhat embarrassing “impossible photo” post (which he corrected later)?
No, Bellingcat, Elliot Higgins, started off as an amateur, unemployed at the time, supporting government arguments in the Libyan insurrection in 2011. I remember him well on the Graun comment columns, using the screen name of Brownmoses. Then afterwards suddenly got a lot bigger, and more professional, and employing people to do analyses. So who’s paying for all that? You don’t get the money to employ people to do pro-government analyses just like that. Somebody has to give you the money, and it’s not difficult to guess who.
An unemployed amateur sounds like a pleonasm, but if your guess is the UK government (and not the donations invited at the bottom of their page) then why the very negative and thoroughly referenced articles on “friendly” Saudi Arabia? Is there any proof that Bellingcat is a mere cat’s paw?
It’s interesting but a good going Third World War between a US/UK alliance and a Russia/China/Iran is maybe something the men in the big seats in London and Washington would wish to unleash. Indeed
It’s all heading that way as the US and the UK offensively show displays of force around the world. Either you press the button and go, or you don’t. And unless and until the UK and the USA has had a bloody face then they will not stop threatening other nations.
Flattening whole cities in the Middle East to rubble from 30,000 feet may be one thing, but do you think the Russians, the Chinese or even Iran would allow even one of their cities to be flattened. I certainly don’t think so and so maybe a bit of blood letting now between the big boys would inoculate the current belligerents from any further military sabre rattling.
The U.K. has forgotten the horror slaughter of the Second World War and more recently the US have forgotten the slaughter of Vietnam.
Maybe someone should remind them.
We’re never allowed to forget WW2. There are four programmes about it on BBC4 alone next week plus the ever present repeats of Dad’s Army and several films.
There’s a difference between having personally experienced the war, as many in my father’s generation did, and watching a pastiche on tele.
Otherwise Americans would have overthrown their government decades ago.
You will know Iran is getting flattened if they try to isolate it first. I think the US could quite easily buy off China with a pledge or two on tariff reductions. With Russia it will take more than that but I’m inclined to think they could be bribed too.
It’s hard to believe they’d attack Iran without making sure Russia and China would keep out of it first. If they do, it could soon get out of control.
All of this is anti-Iran stuff is driven and stoked by Israel and the Israel lobby. Notice they’re keeping out of the spotlight right now which is a sure sign they are up to their eyeballs in it.
Yep Hatuey. Combined US and UK action against Iran could kick off the most horrendous consequences
Israel may well be influencing US policy but in any conflict Israel could easily cease to exist too. Iron Dome or whatever of its ilk would not be enough to insulate Israel from destruction.
The whole area and beyond would burn. The world economy would go into reverse as the combatants flatten each others infrastructures of production. Meanwhile countries like the US and the UK would need to go in to lock down to preserve internal security – and even then could the security of oil, gas and nuclear be guaranteed.
I’m not sure this is a course of action for the wise.
But the neo con hawks abound and with all this sabre rattling we might just find out that War War could be preferable to Jaw Jaw – and all to a rousing rendition of Land of Hope and Glory.
“I think the US could quite easily buy off China with a pledge or two on tariff reductions. With Russia it will take more than that but I’m inclined to think they could be bribed too”.
I fear your racism is showing.
Even if the Russians and Chinese had no sense of honour, they have it from no less an authority than Benjamin Franklin that “we must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately”.
They are both fully aware that the Americans are “not agreement-capable”, so there is no point in negotiating with them except to sound out their thinking. Both nations have been viciously and mercilessly invaded by the USA and other Western nations – something they have not forgotten and will never forget. They both have extremely able military strategists, in the case of China going all the way back to Sun Tzu. You can trust them to take such measures as are necessary for their safety.
Still, with no evidence produced that Iran has send off these missiles, despite the fact that the region is spiked with radar, always watched by satellite and has numerous warships anchored in Bahrain with highly sophisticated methods of detection, thTHE BBC IN EVERY NEWS RELEASE DEALING WITH THIS REGION IS PERPETUATING ALLEGATIONS AS TRUTH, it is the same methods being applied to bang it into people’s brains, as were used during the Scripal affair and the unfounded anti-Semitism allegations, percolated daily for near enough 3 years.
We are being prepared for war with Iran, which will make Brexit go away for Snolly G Johnson, just as the melting glaciers of global ignorance with regards to climate change.
A tatty ancient and crumbling theory of democracy saved once again from the actions of its people, by a flight to war, austerity will carry on, the oaf will claim to have left the EU, after all they are breaking EU laws almost daily, whether its illegal arms sales to Saudi Arabia or announcing trade deals from within the EU.
Why should anybody respect the law when the world is unzipping and the western veneer is unravelling like a ripped jumper?