tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post6026374508669580161..comments2024-03-29T10:51:27.752+13:00Comments on Not PC: Chilcot, Blair and the rights of invasionPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-51013452685329607682016-07-08T09:56:00.101+12:002016-07-08T09:56:00.101+12:00oh and one other thing, there has been one success...oh and one other thing, there has been one success out of Iraq.<br /><br />Iraqi Kurdistan. Freed from genocidal maniacs, peacefully managing their own affairs. Ignored and neglected for decades.Libertyscotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12741049550997300680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-52711143454210098742016-07-08T07:35:14.328+12:002016-07-08T07:35:14.328+12:00Let's not forget what else is behind this. P...Let's not forget what else is behind this. Pure political tribalism.<br /><br />The Labour left and far-left (the latter now leading the Party) is out to "get its party back" from Blair and Blairites, who they haven't forgiven for embracing private sector delivery of health care and school academies, as well as privatisation and a refusal to seriously overturn Thatcher's reforms. Blair's alliance with the great imperialist USA put him beyond the pale, and so the current Labour leader - a man who has supported the IRA and Hamas, who never utters a peep about Russian intervention in Syria, Ukraine or Georgia, talks of "stopping war", when he and the far-left really mean "stop the West engaging in military action ever". Bear in mind George Galloway, who has saluted Saddam Hussein and told Assad how lucky Syrians were to have him as leader, now sees Labour as being back with its roots. Seamus Milne, Jeremy Corbyn's most trusted advisor, has written about all the good the USSR did "despite the horrors and the killings". <br /><br />Yet also look at the other side. The weasels in the Conservative Party who SUPPORTED the Iraqi war and voted for it in large numbers. They would have done exactly the same thing and are attacking Blair because... he won three elections against them and led a profligate government that hiked up public debt and spending that left a bomb for them to clear up once Gordon Brown lost power.<br /><br />There are honourable people who argue, fairly, that the intervention was never justified given the price of blood and money, and that Saddam wasn't really the threat envisaged. However, my view is the biggest flaw was the unwillingness of the Bush Administration to honestly commit to the scale of occupation needed to secure the borders and establish law and order. The cost to do that would have probably been seen to be too much, but it would have delivered, although it would have needed a decade of occupation and a willingness to impose a high degree of control and order that would have been difficult to sustain politically in an age of 24/7 media.<br /><br />Of course the opposite has happened in Syria, with the worst of all options. A "red line" crossed and ignored. Half-arsed backing of an opposition that has a mix of motives, and so ISIS has taken off and Assad has gassed civilians on a grand scale, and Russia has jumped in to back Assad. That's Obama's great legacy. It would have been better to just be neutral on the Syrian civil war, and dealt with whoever from Syria waged war on your allies. Better yet to back up words with deeds, but we can blame Obama being gutless, and he blames it on David Cameron being gutless (after the useless Ed Miliband opposed intervention after indicating he would support it to win virtue signalling points with his party). <br /><br />The lesson is simple. If you are going to overthrow a dictatorship (which is moral), be prepared to take responsibility for what happens next, the cost and the blood needed to make it work. The question is whether any government nowadays can tolerate this and whether the intervention is worth it.Libertyscotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12741049550997300680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-7778256727897238952016-07-07T18:08:51.141+12:002016-07-07T18:08:51.141+12:00Freedom Foundation Viewpoint
It is interesting to ...<a href="http://fff.org/2014/05/27/american-soldiers-did-not-die-defending-our-freedom/" rel="nofollow"> Freedom Foundation Viewpoint</a><br />It is interesting to read libertarian Jacob Hornberger,of Future of Freedom Foundation, with his isolationist approach. His is quite the opposite to Rand's position (which I agree with [her])<br />On "Breaking Views" a conservative blogosphere, there is a Dutch bloke who blames USA's military incursions for much of the woes in the "Middle East"/ rise of militant Islam ~ similar views to Hornberger. Trouble is that there is a smidgen of truth in both<br />PeterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-48949178106430964242016-07-07T12:09:57.222+12:002016-07-07T12:09:57.222+12:00I mightily enjoyed that article Peter. Seven years...I mightily enjoyed that article Peter. Seven years to come up with a whitewash? That's offering succour to the scumbag enemies of the West. gregsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04786701115887458801noreply@blogger.com