I get the sense that Cameronâs case is being dismantled. I donât want to cross threads too much, but the thing he has really fallen down on is the big lie of 70,000 willing and able ground participants. His record in intervention is fucking atrocious, both on the post-conflict and the nation building. After Gaddafi fell in Libya, âa thousand militiasâ sprung up in his place, all part of a desperate murky civil war that has yet to be resolved and has become a fertile ground for extremism.
His comments about âterrorist sympathisersâ were both fucking disgusting, and indicative of the Bush-like overtures he is prepared to unleash upon the House of Commons in order to prop up his invention. And to think, they had a go at McDonnell because he quoted Mao in jest. Cameronâs fucking channeling Dubya and giving Blair a run for his money on Prime Ministerial contributions to the fantasy genre.
This article on the â70,000â moderates opposed to Assad and IS is interesting. It concludes two main things:
the number of fighters is significantly understated, as it ignores the Kurds, and the total is more like 100-120k
this total ignores the regional variances of relative power within the various factions. In some parts of Syria there is relative stability and credible force opposed to the regime and IS. In the south and west however, the scattered nature of the numerous factions make their strength questionable.
Isnât that wishful thinking kiboshed by what Patrick Cockburn states in his article, though? That the problem is that these groups often hate the village down the road as much as they both might hate Assad. Iâm kind of leaning toward what Peter Hitchens says in that interview; it only really makes sense if Cameron is doing this on behalf of Riyadh.
This is increasingly looking like foot in the door stuff for regime change, I reckon. Weâve been down that road before, and weâre still stuck on it, spending national treasure on it for almost 15 years.
What really irks is that Cameron has had five years to get his act together, to build a meaningful solution to the crisis that gets broad support. And yet, both times that he wants us to go into Syria, it follows an atrocity on European soil. Thatâs a dangerously reactive way to go about things. Itâs like making an important decision a couple of seconds after being punched in the face. Youâre not in your right mind.
It is not like âdo nothingâ is the other alternative either. Most of those that have signalled that they are voting against the strikes have professed a wish to address the problem. Just not with this plan, and not with roadblocks like never dealing with Assad or Russia.
Isnât that wishful thinking kiboshed by what Patrick Cockburn states in his article, though? That the problem is that these groups often hate the village down the road as much as they both might hate Assad. Iâm kind of leaning toward what Peter Hitchens says in that interview; it only really makes sense if Cameron is doing this on behalf of Riyadh.
This is increasingly looking like foot in the door stuff for regime change, I reckon. Weâve been down that road before, and weâre still stuck on it, spending national treasure on it for almost 15 years.
What really irks is that Cameron has had five years to get his act together, to build a meaningful solution to the crisis that gets broad support. And yet, both times that he wants us to go into Syria, it follows an atrocity on European soil. Thatâs a dangerously reactive way to go about things. Itâs like making an important decision a couple of seconds after being punched in the face. Youâre not in your right mind.
It is not like âdo nothingâ is the other alternative either. Most of those that have signalled that they are voting against the strikes have professed a wish to address the problem. Just not with this plan, and not with roadblocks like never dealing with Assad or Russia.
Basically tribal nature based on religious and family lines, we had this 500 years ago here, thank fuck that went, maybe we should knock on the door in another 500 and see if they are out of the stoneage yet.
See the problem I have with Corbynâs excuses for not backing the strikes (which I am still decidedly undecided on) is that âwe need to find a political solution to the civil war in Syriaâ!!
Now donât get me wrong we do need a political solution BUT isnât the reson that we want to drop bombs on Syria to wipe out Daesh/IS/ISIL not to stop the civil war that is going on?
We should look be looking to end all wars, full stop. When we bear a measure of collective responsibility, doubly so. Look at how the West gleefully supported, and helped to bring about, the Arab Spring. Cited as a wave of freedom rushing across the oppressive Islamic states, in most cases, it has just led to more instability, not least the Aleppo inspired uprising which kicked off the conflict in Syria. Wanting that disastrous situation to end, presently responsible for the biggest movement of refugees since the Second World War, isnât a bad thing.
Many think itâs an essential pre-requisite for getting ISIS out of Syria.
We should look be looking to end all wars, full stop.
I agree with you wholeheartedly but, unfortuantely, this is such a pipe dream that it will never happen.
Now theyâve got going do you really think that Daesh, and their warped idealology, will suddenly pause and think âHey the infidel West have stopped attacking us, they must be really nice guys after all, maybe we were wrong and we should stop too!â
Would ISIS really leave Syria because a government was democratically voted in? No way, they hate democracy so they would try and bring it down.
Letâs not forget, as Barry in one of his more lucid moments said, the west were going through this sort of shit 500 years ago. We should have learnt from the feudal system and we have come to, what we consider, a better way so why shouldnât we try to encourage other, âless enlightenedâ, cultures to go that route? Trouble is the people who have the power donât want to relinquish it and will fight tooth and nail to hold on to it!
Trouble is, as we have found, the middle east is full of Hydras but instead of another head growing when you chop one off it seems to grow another Hydra.
BTW nothing I have said above condones any military action that we have taken in the middle east/Afghanistan.
Lets not blame the West all the time, self hate is a weapon they use in us, we should simply not help at all, why? We cant do anyting right concerning the Middle East so what do we do?
We stay out, we dont touch it until other Nations nearby help.
We should look be looking to end all wars, full stop. When we bear a measure of collective responsibility, doubly so. Look at how the West gleefully supported, and helped to bring about, the Arab Spring. Cited as a wave of freedom rushing across the oppressive Islamic states, in most cases, it has just led to more instability, not least the Aleppo inspired uprising which kicked off the conflict in Syria. Wanting that disastrous situation to end, presently responsible for the biggest movement of refugees since the Second World War, isnât a bad thing.
Many think itâs an essential pre-requisite for getting ISIS out of Syria.
Lets not blame the West all the time, self hate is a weapon they use in us, we should simply not help at all, why? We cant do anyting right concerning the Middle East so what do we do?
Step away from the âall the Westâs faultâ strawman, Barry. No-one is being that explicit; the post youâre referring to speaks of a âmeasure of collective responsibilityâ, a long way from âwe did it allâ
We stay out, we dont touch it until other Nations nearby help.
Once it started, we were enablers to those upriver. What I donât get is that they donât seem to understand that democracy cannot work well in these cultures, they need dictators to stop the different factions warring.
Pap you hate the West, this Country and all democracy stands for simply because it fills up your rebel meter. Many are like that, hating ones own Nation and everything it does fills a voidâŚ
Once it started, we were enablers to those upriver. What I donât get is that they donât seem to understand that democracy cannot work well in these cultures, they need dictators to stop the different factions warring.
Disagree Cherts, get rid of the people who have and like the power and get you can do.
Pap you hate the West, this Country and all democracy stands for simply because it fills up your rebel meter. Many are like that, hating ones own Nation and everything it does fills a voidâŚ
To quote the great Malcolm Reynolds, âmy days of not taking you seriously are coming to a middleâ.
Did sir ever consider that without the freedoms that my hated West provides, I wouldnât be able to be critical of it? I appreciate that labels are easier to dish out than considered responses, but itâs not one I think applies.
If youâd said âWestern imperialismâ (or indeed, just imperialism) you may have been closer to the mark.