Too Much Information

For weeks now the media have reported the IS actions in Syria.

Have they been providing too much information?  I wonder, if we knew nothing of these kidnaps and subsequent horrific murders, would these captives still be alive today?

Are we feeding the egos of these barbaric individuals with the publicity they crave?  Without the intensive, comprehensive, worldwide publicity provided here and in other Western countries there’s little doubt that they would continue with their medieval styled killings but I suggest the western media is indirectly inflaming the situation.

I have great sympathy for those families left grieving, but there’s a lot to be said for the ‘old fashioned’ method the Foreign Office used in past years, when they refused to comment on hostage situations.

As regular readers will know in the past I’ve been concerned about the amount of specific detail of our troops’ actions on the front line of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Perhaps it’s time the media were asked to tone down their reporting and stop giving these barbarians so much promotion.  

Tweet

The Best Laid Plans ...

As I said a couple of weeks ago I intended to return to blogging but on a reduced scale. Since then my friend who was waiting for an appointment with the breast clinic has had her operation and the surgeon was unable to give her good news.  The next part of the 'process' is 5-day radiotherapy for several weeks and because her family live many miles away, another close friend of hers and myself have offered to help her husband with the hospital attendances which vary from an hour and a half to four hours so far.

Two days before her operation she became a grandmother for the first time and she has been unable to see her beautiful new grandson because she is too ill at present. Every day she sees him on Skype though - another blessing for the internet.

Now to the point of this post. I was furious to hear on the news last night that senior MPs have been pressing David Cameron to hold another vote on invention into Syria if definitive evidence merges linking the Assad regime to the chemical weapons attack.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind led the calls for options to be kept open and of course Paddy Ashdown was close behind.  Last week he stated, in his rounds of the media studios, that : "I've never felt so depressed or ashamed".  I'm sure many of us can remember at least one occasion when he ought to have felt worse.

The PR from the US has been abysmal with Kerry insisting the US has evidence that sarin was used in the attack. Obviously the US has little regard for UN inspectors as he stated his evidence comes from other sources.  Haven't we been down this road before not so long ago?

Critics insist that David Cameron's position is on a shoogly peg but, if he sticks to his promise of respecting last Thursday's vote, then he should be commended rather than pilloried.

The crucial question is: Was it Assad or the 'rebel' forces who used the sarin? That will be more or less impossible to answer and with so many factions - each with their own motive - is it right that we go to war again?  I think not. The consequences would be disastrous for the UK.

It's so easy to make the case on moral grounds but far more difficult to find an intervention that will make things better rather than worse.

The best development, at this point, would be for the Russians to reduce support for Assad and join the effort to find a way to begin to reduce the violence. A diplomatic, political solution is the way forward towards peace.

Let's not forget Vince Cable's department has been found to have permitted companies to sell chemicals, capable of being used to produce nerve gas, to Syria. The government has yet to produce details of any sale.

Tweet

Is Tony Blair Trying To Rewrite History?

Tony Blair says "There's a problem within Islam."  He should know. He helped create it. 

He permitted preachers of Islam to live here and freely expound their messages of hate against 'non-believers'. Anyone who spoke out about this was denounced as a bigot.

Conflict in the Middle East is helping radical groups get a foothold, Blair said, and the “seeds of future fanaticism and terror… are being sown”. source

Are being sown?  They were sown some time ago under Blair's government.  He goes on to say, "Despite long and hard conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq we should not be wary of intervention."

Many times I've said our intervention in the affairs of Iraq and Afghanistan will come to haunt us in the future.  Sadly the future is now the present and we have a divided society.

In his article Blair refuses to acknowledge he was one of the prime movers in changing the demography of these islands so rapidly and with little thought for the people living here or for those who, legally, wanted to live in Britain.  Humans need time to adapt to change but were given no time or platform to voice their concerns. What we have now is a diverse society (Blair's aim), but also a very divided one.

Why divided?  There was no control over the number of immigrants and the amount of work available. That left many without income and in desperate circumstances. People felt alienated in a foreign land and without the support of a job, easily drifted into the wrong company. They couldn't integrate because they had no contact with anyone other than those in a similar situation.

By writing this article is Blair trying to rewrite history or is he in cahoots with David Cameron and attempting to justify our - soon to be - involvement in Syria?

Tweet

We Must Keep Out Of Syria

William Hague spent the Bank Holiday at an EU meeting in Brussels, desperate to persuade his EU colleagues they should not renew their arms embargo against Syria because he wants to be able to ship weapons to the anti-Assad rebels. The EU voted to halt the embargo on weapons deliveries to the Syrian opposition much to Hague's delight.

What is it about recent British governments that they have such a desire to stick their noses into other people's business?

Oxfam has warned of 'devastating consequences' if more arms are sent to Syria and the civil war will escalate into an arms race.

Although the Foreign Secretary says there are no immediate plans to send weapons to Syrian rebels he forgot to mention that the lifting of the arms embargo had conditions attached; one being that no arms could be sent until after 1 August.

Who are the 'rebels'?  It's difficult to say because they are composed of many different factions.  

Of course America is involved too. Last week a bill, authorising the direct arming of Syrian rebels, was passed in Senate committee. For more than a year, the CIA has been facilitating the delivery of arms from countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar to Syrian rebel groups, although the US administration has stopped short of a decision to arm the rebels directly. This latest US bill is aimed at pushing Obama in that direction.

Somehow I can't rid myself of the thought that Hague was only carrying out Obama's instructions by lobbying the EU this past weekend. As Paul Rand states: "How it will blow back at America in the future is not yet known."

The West is now experiencing the blow back from Iraq and Afghanistan. Our involvement two years ago in Libya has not resulted in the democratic New Libya David Cameron promised.

Even if diplomatic efforts fail and the war goes on in Syria, I can think of no reason whatsoever for David Cameron to lead Britain into another country-saving crusade. The Red Cross and Oxfam need financial aid in order to assist refugees. That's where our money should be going and not on weapons. 

Tweet

Our Next War

A British soldier was killed in Afghanistan on Sunday.  Captain Walter Barrie, 41, was serving with the Royal Scots Borderers, 1st Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland when he was shot dead by an individual wearing an Afghan army uniform.

This is the 12th incident this year in which our servicemen have been killed by Afghan soldiers or police and brings the total number of fatalities in the war to 438.

On the Andrew Marr's Sunday Show, General Sir David Richards announced our next war. Hundreds of British troops could be deployed to Syria if the humanitarian crisis worsens he said. I translate that to read 'will' instead of 'could.

It's obvious Obama and Cameron had been discussing this for some time but the US election interrupted their plans.  Now they can continue with their plans.

I don't believe for one minute that our involvement would be limited.  Think back to - then Defence Secretary - John Reid's statement from Kabul in 2006.  We had 3,000 troops deployed there at the time.

 "We're in the south to help and protect the Afghan people to reconstruct their economy and democracy. We would be perfectly happy to leave in three years time without firing one shot."  source

 By then our military had been in Afghanistan for 5 years.  They've now been there for 12 years and the number of troops has risen to 10,000.  So has the number of deaths. Syria will be the next battleground for our armed services, which are being depleted month by month.  Although the appalling reduction in our full-time military is going ahead at considerable spped, the plans to augment the TA are still a pipe dream, because discussions with employers have not yet started and the UK government has little chance of gaining the support of businesses.  But that's a post for another time.

There is a humanitarian problem in Syria, as there is in every war.  The Syrian conflict is complex and, should we become involved, there's little doubt we would be there for some time - not months but years.

Tweet

'Moral Duty' Is A Poor Excuse

Kabul

A British soldier from the 3rd Battalion, The Yorkshire Regiment, has been killed in Afghanistan.

He was part of a patrol to disrupt insurgent activity in the south of Nahr-e-Saraj district in Helmand Province, when he was killed by small arms fire.

The soldier becomes the 417th member of our armed forces to have died since operations in Afghanistan began and his death comes just hours after another soldier from 1st Battalion, The Royal Welsh, was killed on Friday.  He was named yesterday as Corporal Michael John Thacker.

This weekend I watched Rory Stewart's programme Afghanistan - The Great Game, which was broadcast on BBC2 earlier last week. Both parts should be compulsory viewing for all politicians even though I tend to agree with this reviewer. Although Stewart has been criticised for admitting he spent only 32 days walking in Afghanistan, it's 32 days more than any other MP has undertaken.

Yesterday morning, on the BBC's The Big Questions programme, many of the audience were of the opinion that British Forces should intervene in the Syrian conflict as they believed we could save the lives of civilians and it was our moral duty to do so. Only the SNP's MSP Humza Yousaf appeared to have a grasp of the situation there and stated the conflict should be resolved by the Arab nations and not the West.

It is not our responsibility to inflict our culture and systems upon other nations using military force.  History proves that we have done far more harm than good using the excuse of 'moral duty'.

Tweet