tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post9121397594200677835..comments2024-03-29T07:14:55.029+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: Theresa May's Theatrical WarPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-84459202468120796862018-04-15T19:20:45.833+01:002018-04-15T19:20:45.833+01:00«more than matched by the 30 to 50 Labour MPs conv...«<i>more than matched by the 30 to 50 Labour MPs convinced strikes are appropriate (some of whom are so gung-ho it's hard to envisage circumstances where they wouldn't back a military action).</i>»<br /><br />I think that they are very enthusiastic about the russian-iranian-syrian story because it is being spun into a "hidden stockpiles of WMDs" story (I think I heard that before...), for example here a Conservative leader:<br /><br />https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/11/mps-caution-may-against-syria-action-without-commons-vote<br />“Tom Tugendhat, the chair of the foreign affairs select committee, said: "Striking Syria’s stockpiles of chemical weapons would degrade their ability to commit further war crimes..."”<br /><br />which has now become official:<br /><br />https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/15/western-allies-launch-diplomatic-offensive-in-wake-of-syria-strikes<br />“Western powers are to attempt to inject diplomatic momentum behind the military strikes against Syrian government chemical weapon sites by calling for the UN to launch a broad investigation into Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles.”<br /><br />The russian "attack" with WMDs against Salisbury provides one better than Tony Blair's "45 minutes" argument: the "attack" is not merely 45 minutes away, it has already happened. Tony Blair will feel entirely vindicated :-).<br /><br />«<i>let every big power know they can flout international law with impunity, and as a consequence is helping make the world a more uncertain, if not dangerous place.</i>»<br /><br />This was already established in the 1990s, with the 6 month bombing campaign of the capital city of a recognized and sovereign european country, a leader of the "non-aligned" group even, and its invasion and dismemberment. Naturally it is not “<i>every big power</i>” it is only the USA that can do it or give permission (as for Lybia).<br />The UK political class have not forgotten Suez and that no flouting of international law is possible without permission from the USA government.<br /><br />I am personally not scandalized by this -- "realpolitik" happens, and of all unilateralist powers that could have happened the USA is one of the least bad ones, and they mostly leave their protectorates to themselves.Blissexnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-47789168837085069522018-04-15T18:50:44.981+01:002018-04-15T18:50:44.981+01:00«It is ultimately a performative, theatrical war t...«<i>It is ultimately a performative, theatrical war that gives off the impression of "doing something"</i>»<br /><br />A "The Guardian" columnist has argued against such theatricalness, and that a much harder response was need to stop the possibility of more russian "attacks" against the UK and Europe:<br /><br />https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/14/theresa-may-essential-argument-for-syria-strikes-nonsensical<br />“Time and time again Putin has shown his contempt not only for international law (witness Crimea and Salisbury) and chemical weapons conventions (witness Syria and Salisbury), but also western power and pretensions – witness his dismemberment of Ukraine. The case that could be made for May is that we in Britain have recently been attacked by the Russians and are threatened by Putin at large. ... It is a vital British and European interest to demonstrate to Putin that Trump is on our side, not his.<br />Our security and defence services are rightly concerned that Putin may not understand this and might thereby seriously miscalculate, perhaps by invading the vulnerable Baltic states in a widening of his Ukrainian enterprise and quest for nationalistic glory.”<br /><br />I guess the author is arguing that "bomb bomb bomb Moscow" would have been a much better, less theatrical, response; another columnist had earlier argued that even Likud and B Netanyahu have been too pacifist and surrendered to the endargement of israeli citizens by russian and iranian "aggression" near Israel's borders:<br /><br />https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/10/israel-russia-syria-netanyahu-iran-middle-east<br />“The reality is that Israel - and Netanyahu in particular - has badly misread the trajectory of Russia's re-engagement in the Middle East, which has created in the very kindest interpretation the context for Iran's projection of its influence ever further west and ever closer to Israel's borders.”<br /><br />I guess that defending against future attacks means here "bomb bomb bomb Moscow" and "bomb bomb bomb Teheran".<br />Another columnist at "The Guardian" wrote in much the same vein:<br /><br />https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/09/douma-syria-regime-bashar-al-assad-murder-civilians<br />“It’s time for Britain and its allies to take concerted, sustained military action to curb Bashar al-Assad’s ability to murder Syria’s citizens at will.”<br />“Trump should know better now. One feel-good bomb-fest does not a strategy make.”<br /><br />At least this is directed only at the murderous Assad, and I guess that many, many “<i>feel-good bomb-fest</i>”s are then recommended by "The Guardian".<br /><br />That newspaper is the megaphone of the "centrist party", so particularly interesting. The "centrist party" found guilty Putin of the "attack" on Salisbury a month ago:<br /><br />https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2017-19/1071<br />“RUSSIA'S POISONING OF SERGEI AND YULIA SKRIPAL ...<br />That this House unequivocally accepts the Russian state's culpability for the poisoning of Yulia and Sergei Skripal in Salisbury using the illegal novichok nerve agent ... supports the Government's call for a special meeting of the UN Security Council to discuss Russia's use of chemical weapons on UK soil; and resolves to consider support for further proportionate actions to deter future acts of aggression by the Russian state.”<br /><br />I guess that "gung-ho" does not begin to describe the 50 "centrist party" members who signed that "Early Day Motion".Blissexnoreply@blogger.com