Like searching for a date at the end of a Norfolk disco – it’s an ugly choice – do you leave the fascist Assad and his Hezbollah cronies free to fire nerve gas at small children or do you launch strikes with who knows what outcome and find yourself allies of Al-Quaeda, swivel eyed jihadists of the type who bombed the London underground . It’s hard to see why our government feels such a burning and urgent need to get involved – It all smacks of two things – being told by our American masters that we have to join in and the vain posturing of Cameron to do his Churchill bit – Sadly for him it’s all coming across as less like Churchill the Wartime leader and more like Churchill the nodding dog. What’s even more odious is the hissy fit that Cameron is now throwing with Ed Miliband and the Labour party as they insist we at least wait for the UN report and proper evidence – it’s almost like Dave is saying ” I came back from holiday in Cornwall early to launch my cruise missile and you won’t let me”.
Seriously who on earth do our government think they are representing when they talk about possibly sending in ground troops and air and missile strikes to punish Assad’s fascist regime in Syria for the alleged use of nerve gas against the rebels. We all saw the horrendous pictures on television of the victims especially the children and yes it’s horrifying. The question is when we bomb Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya we don’t get shown the pictures there of the torn and shattered bodies of the children. So who actually wants this escalation and possible war with Syria, certainly no member of the voting public I know and as for the ‘punishing’ a regime for using these horrific chemical weapons, is there really a moral difference between killing men women and children with bombs, machine guns or poison gas and nerve agents. The end result is pain, suffering and death so it’s hard to justify getting involved in what is an extremely messy situation, unless there is some other agenda that we’re not being told about.
In 1994 over a million people including women and children were massacred in Rwanda, many of them hacked brutally to death with machetes. We were all so shocked that the UN, NATO and our Government did ….absolutely nothing. But then in Rwanda people were merely chopped up in a bloody tribal genocide, they weren’t the victims of poison gas or nerve gas. I mean if you had to meet a sticky end – which would you find the most immoral way to die, a sharp blade hacking into you, riddled with bullets, blown to smithereens by a cluster bomb or being smothered by some poisonous compound. Which would make you most annoyed.
The hypocrisy is off the scale. During the Iran and Iraq War in 1987/88 a major Iranian offensive was turned back by Saddam Hussein using mustard gas and other chemical weapons which it’s estimated killed over 20,000 Iranian troops. Saddam also used mustard gas against his own Kurdish civilians because they were supporting Iran in the war. Iraq was condemned in the United Nations by almost every country except the USA and of course Great Britain who abstained – well we weren’t as horrified by the use of chemical weapons back then , as we were actually getting good business selling arms and uniforms to Iraq and no doubt many of the chemicals needed to make the poison gas.
let’s pretend for one minute that the USA and Great Britain want to go in there and take out these chemical weapons to save the suffering of the Syrian people – well at least the people living in areas controlled by anti Assad rebel forces. If that’s the case , then why don’t we go into North Korea and save all those millions of suffering civilians who are dying of starvation , why don’t we take over half of the third world’s corrupt governments and feed the starving, disease ridden impoverished millions. perhaps the truth is that going into Syria has got nothing to do with morality or saving kids from death and destruction. It seems that we are never told the clear truth and I wonder why.
In the olden days of The British Empire we’d send our troops and gun boats into the Sudan for instance to stop the Suez canal, our quick trade route to India, being choked off by the Mahdi and his desert army of islamic fanatics in the Sudan who intended to invade Egypt. We sent our armies into Afghanistan to prevent the Russians being able to invade our imperial territories in India. All our ignoble wars were to save our trade and increase our resources in the empire and give Johnny Foreigner a bloody nose into the bargain , we, the public at the time, were told the plain truth. However in those days most of us didn’t have the vote, so whether we approved or disapproved of wars and genocide carried out for profit in our name didn’t matter so for those in power , they never felt the need to lie to us. One thing is for certain, whoever wins in Syria and ends up with control of those chemical weapons in the future, we’re going to create a disastrous situation that could cause devastation in the middle east for decades to come, a war that none of us want and none of us can afford. I wish someone could tell me why.