- Date published:
11:59 am, December 3rd, 2015 - 81 comments
Categories: Syria, uk politics, war - Tags: so it goes, syria, war
BREAKING NEWS – UK MPs have voted to authorise air attacks on Islamic State in Syria
— RNZ News (@rnz_news) December 2, 2015
The children and grandchildren of the London Blitz have voted in favour of further bombing of the children of Syria. #warwhatisitgoodfor
— Thomas Beagle (@thomasbeagle) December 2, 2015
that day when you thought the internet was maybe switched off and nobody would remember what you said. #SyriaVote pic.twitter.com/08FyzD8HcI
— Danny (@doglab) December 2, 2015
David Cameron is damned hypocrite, and his step, sadly supported also by some UK Labour MPs, is not a good one. So more bombs from the air, risking civilian “collateral damage” are going to be the supposed solution.
I fear the west, already heavily involved by the US, France and a few others in the campaign, are going to make the same mistakes. And where are the ground troops, doing the hard and risky jobs on the grounds?
Oh no, they do not want to risk their own soldiers, let others risk their lives.
I ask what allied troops in Syria are there, that the west does rely on? I see and hear only conflicting info. I feel I need to repeat earlier comments.
Given the Russian ruthless attacks, it seems that various fighting groups have now joined ranks, also with Al Nusra Front, which is hardly pro western.
So the Brits will only add fuel to the fire, I fear, and have no plan, unless they will do a 180 degree turn now and dare even support Russia, Iran and Assad, which would certainly make them a future major enemy for any opposition to the Assad regime in Syria.
Next to Assad ISIS is the major enemy, but it will certainly not be beaten by only air strikes, and supporting Assad – even indirectly, will not serve the interest of Britain.
Excellent news that at last the uk will stand alongside Russia and the US. Sad but necessary action.
Can’t wait for those head lines telling us how Western bombs have solved the crisis in Syria and stopped global terrorism. Except that is of course what isn’t going to happen because so far history has shown us that dropping bombs in the Middle East only makes things worse.
All this is going to achieve is more slaughter, more radicalisation and more profits for the Western arms manufacturers. The latter is what I suspect is the actual driving force behind this move.
Oh, there’s a probability that it will cause outright war Between Russia and the West as well if Turkey’s action in shooting down a Russian plane is anything to go by.
That latter I think is my biggest concern. That many Military Aircraft operating independently with different goals in close proximity is just asking for another major incident.
+1 re too many aircraft operating in same theatre all on differing missions. I’m picking airborne cholesterol exess, confused identification, mixed missions & messaging, too limited reaction time will see another major incident before too much longer. Turkey worries me in particular because Erdogan may feel he can afford another shoot-down. He knows NATO has to back him up. Can’t really see how this is all going to pan out. All anyone can do is speculate. It’s such a mess.
And putting any more Western troops, even special forces, into this morass now looks decidedly dodgy.
Russia has released information on the transfer of oil ,and turkeys involvement in the oil smuggling.
They will invoke the binding chapter constraints for enforcement of security council resolution 2199.
Al Jazeera had a good discussion on that topic not long ago, showing that this supposed oil dealing is by now rather miniscule, and not what some claim. ISIS only manage to export rather small amounts of oil now, they have not got the staff and experts to keep wells running, and they are just desperately using last resources, to earn themselves money that way.
The Paris attacks also showed that ISIS are in a corner now, they are desperate, hence these terror attacks, they are actually losing ground already, so Russia’s claims and grand standing are just more propaganda, same as much that comes from western governments.
ISIS have not succeeded in getting people on their side, in the territories they hold, as they rule with a hard hand, and make little friends. They are digging their own grave as it seems, so Cameron may beat the drum of British contribution, it is just more of the same, short sighted nonsense from western governments, that do not see the greater picture, or choose not to see it.
Once ISIS is gone there will be other ones, that the west and Russia will dislike, as they may take position against their hegemonic desires and interests. This is an ongoing drama unfolding in the Mid East, and parts of Africa and Central Asia.
I agree with your sentiment, this is the wrong move. But, to say that the politicians (both cons and lab) voted for this, by thinking … “yes I am voting for this because I want a military manufacturers to make more money”, is just stupid. But my goodness what a mess. The West sure know how to fuck things up don’t they. If they do nothing, innocent civilians get slaughtered by Isis for simply being the wrong brand of their own religion, if they bomb ISIS, innocent people die too. Which is worse? No idea. I see a lot of bashing, but no sensible alternatives either. Bombing ISIS is not going to help. 5 years later, they will emerge somewhere else, and be called something else. But, if they don’t bomb them, ISIS grows, then takes over a country, get it’s hands on an army and a tax take, then what? That thought is unimaginable. What is the answer? I don’t know. Dropping these bombs just feels wrong to me, but, is doing nothing better. I have no idea.
Nope. Just look at our governments for the last thirty years. They’ve all legislated to increase profits and usually at the expense of everyone else.
You’re forgetting the third option – that the people living there deal with Daesh. All the rest of the world needs to do is to stop any money and arms going in or out of the place.
Option three is the obvious one. Restrict the money and arms. If ‘all the world’ is against ISIS then logically this should not be a problem. But the worlds arms manufacturers are well entrenched with huge tentacles in our political systems and won’t go quietly.
Then, put money back into these societies to rebuild their destroyed infrastructures, as we did with Germany and Japan after the world war. How many schools, roads and hospitals can be built for the price of a dozen F16 fighters and missiles used? Especially if we get the local people involved and not some greedy US corporation who is only there for the profit. Sorry, my naivety is showing…
Absolutely agree with your last sentence Draco t B. It’s just Big Business now. People say there are no winners in war, but they would be wrong. The so called *winners* are the ones making billions out of supplying the werewithal to enable this ongoing Hiding to Nothing. Every day citizens are just cannon fodder but the Pollies get to posture and beat there chests and arms dealers get to make their money and power at the expense of so many innocent people. Horrible, horrible. Oh, and Cameron is a wanker!
“All this is going to achieve is more slaughter, more radicalisation and more profits for the Western arms manufacturers. The latter is what I suspect is the actual driving force behind this move.”
Ae. Weighing up being peaceniks vs being on the side of the arms industry/warmongers and making a stand with allies, I’m willing to bet that the risks of certain further attacks in the UK, including deaths, have been designated acceptable collateral damage.
That’s a bit simplistic i think. I am with you, more bombing is not the answer, solves nothing. But, if ISIS is not wiped out, and they grow to overthrow a country, and get their army and tax take .. then what? Those poor people living over there now, imagine what would happen to them then. If ISIS are wiped out, are they really? No, they’ll be back, more dangerous than before. What a mess.
You mean like our own aristocrats did back in the dim dark past?
A lot of people in the West think that we’ve always been the way we are now when our forebears were just as brutal as Daesh is today.
But this thread is about the UK bombing Syria, which is different issue than controlling the Daesh. The UK could take a peace-promoting stance instead. But they haven’t, because of self-interest (and I agree with Draco, it’s about other things, not preventing terrorism in the UK).
But, if ISIS is not wiped out, and they grow to overthrow a country, and get their army and tax take .. then what? Those poor people living over there now, imagine what would happen to them then.
That situation has existed for some time. Perhaps you have heard of Saudi Arabia?
And you’ve signed up to do your share of the killing, Amy?
Well, I just hope that the UK Labour members now vote those Labour MPs who voted for this out of being a candidate at the next election.
It’s all about these politicians appearing strong in front of the public. This is what got Bush into Iraq. The need for revenge. The US [and UK] leaders must appear strong and punish the bad guys, overriding common sense, negotiation and wanting to understand the cause of it all. More bombing and killing is never the long term answer. History confirms that. Sadly, the majority of people/voters lap it up. Us pacifists are the silent minority.
More stupidity from the UK.
Let’s hope that is not infectious.
Sadly it is. Knowing our own PMs willingness to suck up to other big-name politicians (to look even better on TV) I can see a few foreign policy ‘adjustments’ coming. After all, it’s taxpayers money and lives he’s playing with, not his own. This is how the world works if you’re a leader. Self-interest and ego before all else. Just watch the Republicans/presidential candidates in the US who have turned it into a vile art form.
I’m half expecting to hear that we’ve just bought either some second hand f16’s or perhaps some brand new f35s and that we’ll be joining in the bombing.
Nah, you know they won’t Draco. No way is any government here going to spend any more than the absolute bare minimum on our military. It does have the dubious benefit of meaning our personnel & military equipment losses will be minimal when our pollies do cave in and get us involved in conflicts we should stay out of.
“Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.”
Martin Luther King Jr. (‘The Quest for Peace and Justice’)
Brilliant quote! Jones. MLK was a great man.
that’s why they ended him.
Martin Luther King preached and wrote about the parable of the Good Samaritan (used as justification by Hilary Benn in the House of Commons) and his interpretation changed with time.
This is a good discussion of what MLK saw in the parable and what he drew from it.
Robbers, he said, believe that “What is yours is mine.” Priests and Levites believe, as do many law-obeying people, that “What is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours,” and do nothing to assist others. The third way, that of the Samaritan, the despised half-breed, religious apostate and unclean foreigner, is “What is mine is yours.”
King moved beyond looking at helping the way-laid traveller and saw the need to fix the road from being a trap for travellers, but then also to fix society so that robbers need not be robbers. If people were not so desperate, then they might not prey on others.
Which of these four responses- the robber, the Priest, the Samaritan, or King’s- is being acted on by Benn’s support for, and the actions of, the British government?
What would King have preached, in 2015?
Expected but still so disappointing.
““We should also be talking about Yemen in the context of security, asking where is the next place that Isis will go? The answer is Yemen. Because of the instability caused by the bombing, we have helped created the next space for Isis after Syria. This is where they will retire to.””
Hah, they are already there, they are in Yemen, in the West Bank and Gaza, in Sinai, in Libya, in more African countries, they are almost all over the place, even having some followers in France, UK, Australia, Germany and the US.
We better prepare for more to come, not necessarily from IS, once they may be taken out of business, as long as certain people and groups of people get marginalised, discriminated against, and also attacked, there is a never ending reservoir of future potential for new terrorism, not just islamic.
Guess it’s time to put money on Syria winning the football under 20 world cup in 2027.
Yeah, I would too.. but do you really believe that Sepp Blatter will let it happen?
The UK have learned stuff all, what they will get is this, like the Hamas in Gaza:
You may add this “activism”:
And ISIS online propaganda has not been stopped at all:
More propaganda directed at Muslim believers, it is rather concerning:
And yet another smart attack by ISIS to reach to the wider Muslim and sympathetic community:
yeah… No dispute
In my early years of teaching I knew Principals who deliberately cracked down too hard on petty uniform matters because, they said, if we do not deflect them onto fighting over these trivial matters, they (the students) will rebel over more important ones. Better to make the battle over school uniform than over something more important. Rebellion was to be expected anyway.
I saw it then and still see it now as a form of foolish oppression. But I wonder if it is not still a widely-used technique in what prats like Cameron see as ‘policy’. He is deliberately exacerbating Syria’s civil war. Cui bono?
Some background context to the ISIS problem:
‘John Pilger on Paris, ISIS and Media Propaganda (280)’
“Afshin Rattansi goes underground with John Pilger. Award winning journalist and author, John Pilger talks to us about how Washington, London and Paris gave birth to ISIS-Daesh. Plus we examine the media’s role in spreading disinformation ahead of a vote in Parliament for UK bombing of Syria. Afshin looks at the Autumn Statement and why in a time of high alert we are cutting the police force and buying drones. Also we look at which companies are benefitting from the budget. Plus Afshin is joined once again by former MP and broadcaster, Lembit Opik, to look at the weeks news from a cyber sinking feeling over Trident to budget boosts for the BBC.”
+lots, thanks Chooky, required viewing for anyone wanting to know some truth about western policy in the Middle east.
Mixed feelings about Al Nusra:
Update on Jeremy Corbyn. Syria stance getting him mixed results….
Just after he won his leadership election, he became the first opposition leader in sixty years of polling to start out with a negative rating, with more people saying he was doing badly than well. His net score then of minus eight soon got worse. Two weeks ago it was minus 22.
Now it is minus 41, with just 24% saying he is doing well and 65% saying badly. It is even negative among people who voted Labour in May; his net score with them is minus six.
More on the shit that goes on in ‘Syria’, it is a disaster, but who cares?
I have apprehension towards AL Nusra, but consider them the lesser evil.
That is scary shit. They sing about killing Christians. A 6 or 7 year old wants to be a suicide attacker: that’s his aim in life. ISIS is doing the same schooling up the young. Persecution, retribution & cruelty on all sides seems to have become part of the social fabric.
if there must be a fight between factions of the moslem faith and factions of the christian faith why not make the fight somewhat more honerable by having an even playing field , for instance pit 1000 of their men against 1000 of ours the two sides using more or less identicle basic weapons .This battle could have global tv coverage so that the families of both sides could see how well or how badly each fought or who cheated or conspired to have an unfair advantage . Since it could be argued that terrible wars have perpetuated at least in part because the public at large remains ignorant of their true awfullness thanks to the sanitised reporting of them by most media and a steady diet of crappy movies and crappy tv , this new senario would ensure everybody knew exactly how a man dies .The only aircraft permissable would be air ambulances for the wounded and the dead and all participating soldiers would be treated immediately and impartially .Goes without saying all would be volunteers.apologies for the spelling.
Perhaps the fight could be held in a place where independent outsiders can judge the result for themselves, maybe even in some kind of “Colosseum.”
It’s different when an English-speaking nation does it. Then it’s a police action, not an act of war. <—- This is sarcasm.
The brutality of war:
Those that support Russia are no different to fascists that supported Hitler! Get screwed!
Also look at this shit:
More evil shit:
Why are you so anti-Russian? Surely our own propaganda is equally flawed. No faults on our side at all? Give me a break. Once I had reached a certain age and maturity, I would never have supported either Hitler or Stalin.
I do not admire what we Westerners have done to the Middle East. We have made the problem – the Russians are late arrivals. Get real. (Getting real is much better than getting screwed, I would imagine.)
I am not anti Russian, rather had hoped they did a better job
they’re doing a better job of halting the Islamist militants in their tracks than 15 months of US airstrikes, but they are still making mistakes and there will be civilian deaths.
So re the above, do you largely sheepish, docile NZers even understand what is goin g on in Syria? Maybe get back to fun distraction and other BS, you are great at that, are you not? I am sick of shallow cretins I meet every day. Fuck NZ
Tch tch diddums. You are not rational.
The one not being rational is you, i am sick of your arrogance
Mike the Savage one – I withdraw everything. Well, some…
If you look at the times, I thought at 9.49 that you were responding to my message of 9.45 … but your message is timed at 9.01. So you apparently could not have read either of my messages, and you apparently were not responding to me.
OK… The complexities of blogsites.. Even so, I still find you very one-sided.
No probs I know a lot, some of it is not what most like to hear.
Not entirely ignorant myself, I hope. In 70th year, studied history and like reading about it. I even remember some of it.
Always try to distance myself emotionally to make fair judgement, but… Even read Robert Fisk’s big book, etc..
I want to hear what most do not like to hear. I will check out your videos now.
I only hope the above will wake a few more people up. who have largely been asleep.
Sorry Mike, but all that told me nothing more than I had already learned from the terrible, tragic disastrous war that we Westerners forced upon Viet Nam.
We have learned nothing at all.
More bombs were dropped on Viet Nam than were dropped throughout the whole of World War 2. And we still lost in Viet Nam – and we bloody well deserved to lose, when you read the real history.
And I have just re-read your post at the start of this thread. Maybe we can agree that this is yet another bloody great cock-up (never mind that it is a human tragedy for millions) that will be put to us as a noble cause..?
If you want to read about cock ups, and you have not already read it I can recommend Thomas Pakenhams “The Boer War” For Blair and Bush and the Iraqi Oil, read Milner and Rhodes and the Rand Gold. One of most tragic things about this obscene affair, additional to the disgusting concentration camps the poms set up killing over 20,000 Boer women and children, some of the British incompetent upper crust shits who ran the show went on to also run the 14/18 show with the same mind set, arsoles like Butcher Haig
UK Approves Bombing of Syria: ‘Loss of Innocent Lives Is Sadly Almost Inevitable’
Ahead of vote, Prime Minister David Cameron described Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as ‘terrorist sympathizer’ for opposing bombing campaign
‘Terrorist Sympathizer’ like in ‘Erdogan’? Or ‘Terrorist Supporter’ like in ‘Saudi Arabia’?
If anything, Cameron IS a Terrorist, just like Bliar was a Terrorist.
How do these scumbags ever end up in these positions? Giving Dick to dead Pigs?
Well, I guess to be a scumbag is pretty much a prerequisite for any political position
The Great Britain with a Pigfuçke® as prime. I seriously wish Luis Buñuel would still be around
to make a movie about this. ‘le charme discret de la bourgeoisie3’ was a first take
on the sickness of the upper class.
He would have loved to give the Pigfuçke® an audience.
Hey, UK! How long are you going to wait until you throw this bastard into the Tower? Wasn’t it made for scum like him? Or are you seriously backing this filth up? Remember that it will rub off onto you if you don’t disassociate yourself from this criminal.
Cameron. Eton educated Tory.
Eton. Public (i.e. private) school producing people with no knowledge of reality.
Tory. Derived in the 1700s from the Gaelic word “Thoraid” meaning thief , coined by the Whigamores of the day. Nothing has changed in the British Parliament since the 1700s apart from the country having a fully enfranchised educated public that no-one listens to.
At least Jeremy Corbyn now knows who are the 67 Tory Quislings in his Labour Party.
Fascinating that there doesn’t need to be any sensible reason to extend the air forces strikes illegally into Syria.
Russia, Syria, France, USA can’t handle job Mr. Cameron?
Obvious ulterior motives here.
67 supposed Labourites against eh? Well, their service to their true party has put them out quite far this time. Corbyn receives disdain from the Upper Class Twit Tory Pigsticker. But he’s Labour leader today because of a huge influx of new members to the party that have known his positions long and well. These imperialist toady fake Labourites are in trouble and they know it. The Tories are safe as long as things go okay. Tory voters don’t care about international law. No Brit boys dead and not too many atrocities on the telly. But Labour voters do care. More importantly, the millions of nonparticipating citizens who if they merely bothered to vote their honest opinion on the simple question “which candidate is best” care as well if ever forced to face the question straight on.
Cameron just keeps adding things to juggle during is b.s. “austerity based recovery” economic high-wire act/robbery. Unless things go swimmingly, he’s out by 2020 – latest.
Britain is at war in Syria
sums it up a bit crudely
Blair/Cameron/Bush/Obama all the same. Loving their power to fuck shit up and make some MONEY
Putin just said:
“Some countries in the Middle East and North Africa, which used to be stable and relatively prosperous – Iraq, Libya, Syria – have turned into zones of chaos and anarchy that pose a threat to entire world,” Putin said. “We know why it happened. We know who wanted to oust unwanted regimes, and rudely impose their own rules. They triggered hostilities, destroyed statehoods, set people against each other and simply washed their hands [of the situation] – giving way to radicals, extremists and terrorists.”
And he would be right about all that.
We know who wanted to oust unwanted regimes, and rudely impose their own rules.
Er, the people living there? Well, they’ve mostly been given a real lesson in not imagining they might get a say in the running of their own countries, so Vlad should be chuffed.
What do you mean “Er, the people living there?”
Unless you mean organised colour revolution groups receiving hundreds of millions of dollars of State Department funding to agitate for “freedom”, as Victoria Nuland admitted the US did in Ukraine. (Except in the Ukraine she said the US had invested $5B in ‘freedom loving activities’ against the then Ukranian government.)
By “the people living there,” I mean the people living there, who decided they didn’t like whatever flavour of authoritarian nationalist dictatorship was running the place. Your fond delusion that only foreigners could be to blame for local dissatisfaction with living under a corrupt dictatorship has comedy value but nevertheless remains a delusion.
And the estimated 50,000 to 100,000 foreign jihadis now fighting against Assad in Syria as well as against the Baghdad Government in Iraq?
From throughout Europe (especially including the UK, Belgium, France, Sweden), the Middle East (including NATO ally Turkey and US allies Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE), USA, Chechnya and the Caucuses?
Are these now suddenly also the “people living there”?
Makes me laugh how some UK MP’s refer to fighting “religious fascism”.
Does that mean that great citadel of religious fascism, the Holy See will be bombed next?
Or perhaps Poland, where hard right governments, backed by the Catholic Church have banned abortion and birth control?
And comparing ISIS and Nazi Germany are wide of the mark — given that Germany in 1939 was that time’s equivalent of a superpower, with one of the world largest miltaries with highly trained officers, extensive industrial capalilities, and a wide R and D infrastructure. A German invasion and occupation was very real. Whereas ISIS have no chance of taking over any country in the middle east, let alone Europe.
Right wing propagandists fearmongering of ‘Barbary hordes’ rampaging through Europe fail to stand up to scrutiny.
They seem to be doing so.
Couple of points:
A majority of Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet supported him, – NOT the ‘air strikes’ (a euphimism for the sadistic bombing of thousands of human beings ) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-air-strikes-majority-of-shadow-cabinet-backed-jeremy-corbyn-but-more-than-a-third-of-labour-a6758166.html
Around 80% of readers of The Independent do NOT support it: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-air-strikes-mps-vote-for-intervention-against-isis-but-almost-80-of-readers-do-not-support-it-a6758206.html
Britain’s youngest MP has vowed to “never forget the noise” of the MPs cheering the bombing pass. 21 yr old Mhairi Black describes it as “a very dark night in parliament” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-air-strikes-mhairi-black-vows-never-to-forget-the-noise-of-mps-cheering-bombs-a6758231.html
the west doesn’t care about syria or isis… is all just hollow political rhetoric and giving their military things to do (including buying stuff off the politicians friends)
the wider public don’t care or know much about nay of this cause the media confuses the issues via opinion pieces not facts (or expert insight) in their quest for ratings and the latest Kardashian story
we are living in a Orwellian nightmare – we are the lucky as we’re not important and a long way from anything
a pox on all those who continue to propagate the horror
US general Flynn, former head of special forces, apportions responsibility for ISIS.
Some posters are delusional thinking the west and in particular the u.s.a acts in the interests of the people of the world or is interested in democracy for them …………
The facts are they will support brutal murdering dictators and remove democratic governments if they can make money or gain resources ………… “The document describes how the biggest regional threat to US interests was “the trend in Latin America toward nationalistic regimes” that responded to “popular demand for immediate improvement in the low living standards of the masses” and for production geared to domestic needs. This trend was in direct collision with US policy….”
“The documents make clear that it was necessary for the US to control the Latin American military, which were explicitly assigned responsibility for overthrowing civilian governments that obstructed US interests.”http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2004/339-reagan-visions-of-the-damned-part-1.html
The problem with Assad, Saddam and Ghadafi was not that they were/are ruthless and brutal dictators …………. The problem is they were not ‘our’ dictators and they had gone ‘rouge’ and were most likely trading with the Russians/Chinese
Radical Islam has previously been cultivated and supported by the c.i.a and others to fight communism, weaken the PLO and fight proxy wars ….
The middle east is reaping what our Governments have sown and I personally will be shocked and awed if more bombs does not expand and increase the suffering of the people left over there.
I wonder what sorry bad mess “mission accomplished’ will end up looking like this time …………..