No smilies, no avatars, no flashing gifs. Just discuss the issues of the day, from last night's telly via football to science or philosophy.
Started by GyratingTrampoline on Apr 16, 2018 9:05:10 AM
Stop the war protests against Syria attack
Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Agaliarept - 16 Apr 2018 09:32:40 (#1 of 209)

If they ignored the rules about getting parliament backing what are the chances they will listen to the great unwashed masses?

Does protesting really work?

I marched against the Iraq war. If I had the same levels of faith I did back then I'd possibly join.

Yammoto - 16 Apr 2018 09:36:33 (#2 of 209)

They think Assad should keep his chemical weapons and carry on using them?

ChankNolen - 16 Apr 2018 09:42:33 (#3 of 209)

Assad has had a tap on the wrists, it is pretty clear that the US intention is to go no further.

In one sense, we are probably better off with Trump's administration being in charge of this than the liberal interventionists who might otherwise have been in charge of the White House.

Trump's instinct seems to be that there is no overriding US national interest in provoking a war over the fate of Syrian civilians, which some might see as cynical but from my perspective represents a healthy shift back towards realpolitik after the liberal fantasies that underpinned Iraq and (to a lesser extent) Afghanistan.

SharkPatoo - 16 Apr 2018 09:46:50 (#4 of 209)

Trump waves his willy, Putin waves his back, May let’s out a manly fart, Macron does a smarmy smile, Assad jumps up and down like a spoilt child. It’ll all be forgotten by bed time. Shame about the dead people.

ChankNolen - 16 Apr 2018 09:52:55 (#5 of 209)

The bottom line is that even if every man, woman and child in Syria is barbecued that won't actually affect my quality of life whereas an all-out war with Russia would put a serious crimp in my day.

It is - probably - narrowly correct to engage in a bit of gesture bombing to defend the 'rules based international order' but not to the point where we provoke a world war.

Tagyourit - 16 Apr 2018 09:56:18 (#6 of 209)

Stop the War do seem rather picky about which bits of war they complain about, didn't see them taking the streets last week in reaction to the gassings and did they march against the Russian annexation of Crimea?

Yammoto - 16 Apr 2018 09:57:54 (#7 of 209)

No. Seamus got the nod on that one.

Goneril - 16 Apr 2018 10:00:48 (#8 of 209)

#6 - Is there any point in taking to the UK streets in reaction to what other countries' governments do?

SheikYerbouti - 16 Apr 2018 10:02:36 (#9 of 209)

- other countries

+ our

TRaney - 16 Apr 2018 10:03:06 (#10 of 209)

Is there any point in taking to the UK streets in reaction to what other countries' governments do?

That's a fair point I was about to make myself. Do they have links to other similar organisations in Russia, etc?

Tagyourit - 16 Apr 2018 10:06:59 (#11 of 209)

Is there any point in taking to the UK streets in reaction to what other countries' governments do?

Well they do seem to protest outside the Israeli and American embassies a fair bit so they obviously think there is.

Hilary - 16 Apr 2018 10:07:23 (#12 of 209)

Is there any point in taking to the UK streets in reaction to what other countries' governments do?

That doesn't seem to worry StopTheWar when they take to the UK streets to protest against Israeli govt actions.

What stinking hypocrisy.

SheikYerbouti - 16 Apr 2018 10:09:22 (#13 of 209)

Quality cynicism from old Chankers here, but he's probably about right. A bit of a smart bomb 'slap on the wrist' maintains the proprieties while minimising the risk of escalation. Horrible old business, but there you go.

TRaney - 16 Apr 2018 10:09:31 (#14 of 209)

At least no serious politicians associate with this rabble

ChankNolen - 16 Apr 2018 10:10:29 (#15 of 209)

The desire to protest is very much linked to the mindset that We Are Always Wrong.

As I've said before, even the Iraq protest (which I went on) was dominated by the kind of simplistic analysis that you see all too often on here.

If I go on a Syria protest, I will be sure to make a placard that says 'Are You Sure You Have Thought This Through?' or possibly 'Military Action Only To The Extent Necessary To Preserve The Rules Based International Order'.

HerrWalrus - 16 Apr 2018 10:18:55 (#16 of 209)

Russian and US bombs have been deployed most days over the last few years in Syria. What a mess.

SinnerBoy - 16 Apr 2018 10:43:50 (#17 of 209)

Good joke, Chank. I mean, Bush, Wolfowitz, Cheyney, Bolton, Rumsfeld etc al are all wimpy liberals, right?

SheikYerbouti - 16 Apr 2018 10:52:04 (#18 of 209)

'liberal intervention' is a concept that dates from the Clinton era.

TRaney - 16 Apr 2018 10:52:34 (#19 of 209)

he applied it mainly to interns though

ChankNolen - 16 Apr 2018 11:01:49 (#20 of 209)

'I mean, Bush, Wolfowitz, Cheyney, Bolton, Rumsfeld etc al are all wimpy liberals, right?'

In terms of schools of foreign policy, Bush 2 neo-conservatism is much closer to liberal interventionism than it is to the traditional realist school of foreign policy pursued by previous Republican administrations. That was why Bush was able to make common cause with a true liberal interventionist, Blair.

There are different points of emphasis though, liberal interventionists generally place greater emphasis than the neo-cons on the role of international institutions, which is why Blair spent so much time trying to effect a second UN vote when Bush clearly wasn't that fussed.

Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Check Subscriptions
|
Home » UK News