The Arab Spring and "the War on Terror"

[RockyVanParlour]

This video is very moving

Egyptian Revolution 2011- The Most Dramatic Footage From the 18-day Revolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J56oGIznUOQ

[theunderstudy]

Bloody hell. Unrest doesn't cover it.

[coda]

They need to get Gaddafi up against a wall and shot Ceaușescu style.

[Genie]

They are really worried he's going to go out with a bang, quite literally. They fear he'll use chemical or biological weapons on the people before he goes :shock:

With the natural disasters people in the US, Australia and NZ have to deal with and the political unrest in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya we really do have a lot of things pretty easy in this country (doesn't stop us moaning though )

[Jon]

With the natural disasters people in the US, Australia and NZ have to deal with and the political unrest in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya we really do have a lot of things pretty easy in this country (doesn't stop us moaning though )

The weather can be a bit shit though, can't it?

[Genie]

With the natural disasters people in the US, Australia and NZ have to deal with and the political unrest in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya we really do have a lot of things pretty easy in this country (doesn't stop us moaning though )

The weather can be a bit shit though, can't it?

Tell me about it, I sick of waiting for my lawn to start growing so I can test out my new petrol mower!

[Wainy316]

With the natural disasters people in the US, Australia and NZ have to deal with and the political unrest in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya we really do have a lot of things pretty easy in this country (doesn't stop us moaning though )

The weather can be a bit shit though, can't it?

Tell me about it, I sick of waiting for my lawn to start growing so I can test out my new petrol mower!

Mow the carpet.

[Danwichmann]

With the natural disasters people in the US, Australia and NZ have to deal with and the political unrest in places like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya we really do have a lot of things pretty easy in this country (doesn't stop us moaning though )

The weather can be a bit shit though, can't it?

Tell me about it, I sick of waiting for my lawn to start growing so I can test out my new petrol mower!

Rob needs a haircut....

[blandy]

Wasn't Cameron's (and the other folks) visit long planned - i.e. not an "opportunist" visit on the back of a revolution?

That said, presumably he was going to visit Mubarak, originally.

Cairo wasn't part of the scheduled trip.

Amid fears in Downing Street that a traditional trade visit would have looked out of place, as protests sweep across the Arab world, the PM hastily added a six-hour stopover in Cairo, including a walkabout in Tahrir Square.

(From here).

It says the PM began a long-scheduled trade mission..., so although the stop over in Cairo wasn't scheduled, I don't have a problem with the plane landing there, as he was in the area anyway, and him geting off and having a look about and spouting some political stuff - it's harmless and what they all do. I don't think anyone was trying to sell arms to Egypt on the trip.

Other Grauniad article

Opponents of Britain's arms trade are "completely at odds with reality", David Cameron said, as he hit out critics of his three-day visit to the Gulf.

In a staunch defence of Britain's arms exports, as he tours the region with a group of senior defence manufacturers, Cameron said it was wrong to leave small Gulf countries to fend for themselves.

Speaking in Kuwait, which is marking the 20th anniversary of the expulsion of Saddam Hussein's forces, Cameron said: "The idea that we should expect small and democratic countries like Kuwait to be able to manufacture all their means of defence seems to me completely at odds with reality."

The prime minister indicated irritation with his critics when was asked during a press conference with his Kuwaiti counterpart how he could promote democracy and reform in the Middle East while travelling with businessmen selling arms to the region.

Cameron said: "I simply don't understand how you can't understand how democracies have a right to defend themselves. I would have thought this argument is particularly powerful right here in Kuwait which, 20 years ago, was invaded by a thuggish bullying neighbour who disrespected your sovereignty, invaded your country and destroyed parts of your capital city.

He added: "Are we honestly saying that for all time, forever and a day, that countries like Kuwait have to manufacture and maintain every single part of their own defences? I think very few people considering that argument for any time would give it any consideration at all."

Cameron mounted a three-point defence of his Gulf tour:

• On the 20th anniversary of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, it is right that the emirate should be allowed to defend itself. "The idea that Kuwait should not be able to have its own armed forces that are able to defend its own country and take part in the defence trade in that way – I find an extraordinary argument for us to make when we extended such help to Kuwait and when British service personnel played such a huge role."

• Britain has tough export licences governing its arms sales. "When Britain does take part in the defence trade we do so with probably the tightest set of export licences and rules almost anywhere in the world. It is obviously a difficult process to get right on every occasion. But we do have very, very tough controls, and very clear controls.

"The idea that we should expect small and democratic countries like Kuwait to be able to manufacture all their means of defence seems to me completely at odds with reality. So a properly regulated trade in defence is not something we should be ashamed of. The fact that there are British companies on this visit like British Aerospace or Thales or others that have a perfect right in this regard stands for itself."

• None of the five Memoranda Of Understanding, signed with Kuwait, cover defence. They instead focus on energy and technology.

Cameron said: "I am very proud to have brought to Kuwait such a wide range of not just businesspeople, but also people involved with cultural and other endeavours. It is important, as Britain wants to link itself with some of the fastest growing parts of the world and to improve our trade relations, that we take such delegations of business people."

Sheikh Nasser Mohammed al-Ahmed al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti prime minister, said: "The distinguished delegates who have arrived with the prime minister are in various types not only military aspects. In our four-year plan the budget is £70bn. We welcome all the British companies and to go ahead with us."

For me it's fine to hold a different view to Cameron re the Arms trade, but if so explain that, argue that point...but to say he took a load of arms salesmen to Egypt ..to sell them arms, when it was no such thing weakens the arguments and weakens a genuine case.

[b23avfc]

Will I get moaned at on facebook if I put up "The people are revolting" ... maybe (I know it's far from original nowadays even though the young 'uns don't know about about MP)

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I have a feeling Gaddafi is going to need taken out before he does something drastic..

[peterms]

Wasn't Cameron's (and the other folks) visit long planned - i.e. not an "opportunist" visit on the back of a revolution?

That said, presumably he was going to visit Mubarak, originally.

Cairo wasn't part of the scheduled trip.

Amid fears in Downing Street that a traditional trade visit would have looked out of place, as protests sweep across the Arab world, the PM hastily added a six-hour stopover in Cairo, including a walkabout in Tahrir Square.

(From here).

It says the PM began a long-scheduled trade mission..., so although the stop over in Cairo wasn't scheduled, I don't have a problem with the plane landing there, as he was in the area anyway, and him geting off and having a look about and spouting some political stuff - it's harmless and what they all do. I don't think anyone was trying to sell arms to Egypt on the trip...

For me it's fine to hold a different view to Cameron re the Arms trade, but if so explain that, argue that point...but to say he took a load of arms salesmen to Egypt ..to sell them arms, when it was no such thing weakens the arguments and weakens a genuine case.

The scheduled trip was to the Gulf states, to sell arms. Egypt was not part of the planned trip. Adding it in does indeed look like an opportunistic visit on the back of a revolution.

I don't know whether the arms salesmen also stopped off in Egypt, or kept to the planned schedule. Presumably if they weren't trying to sell arms there, they might have gone straight to the scheduled first stop instead. If they were on the same transport, they might have just waited around for a few hours, done a bit of sightseeing - who knows.

The planned trip to the Gulf states was for arms sales, and I imagine Mr C may have felt a little self-conscious about that, given what's been happening in places like Bahrain, not to mention the training we gave their police in how to handle demonstrators. I'm sure he'll not feel too hurt by any criticism, though. He seems to have a thick skin.

[theunderstudy]

I have a feeling Gaddafi is going to need taken out before he does something drastic..

I would agree.

[OutByEaster?]

It's tangential, but I wonder what'll happen to the various Libyan documents on that Lockerbie Bombing business - The bloke who got put away for it didn't have anything top do with it.

It'd be revealing to see what the real truth of deals done etc is. So we probably won't get to see.

The Beeb"]BBC Arabic are reporting that former Libyan Justice Minister Mustafa Abdul Jalil - who has resigned during the unrest - has told a Swedish newspaper that he has evidence Colonel Gaddafi personally ordered the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988, which killed 270 people.

[snowychap]

Seems like the planes intended for Libya haven't, as yet, taken off.

[theunderstudy]

Seems like the planes intended for Libya haven't, as yet, taken off.

Nimrods....?

[snowychap]

Nimrods.

Same to you with knobs on.

[blandy]

The scheduled trip was to the Gulf states, to sell arms. Egypt was not part of the planned trip. Adding it in does indeed look like an opportunistic visit on the back of a revolution.

I don't know whether the arms salesmen also stopped off in Egypt, or kept to the planned schedule. Presumably if they weren't trying to sell arms there, they might have gone straight to the scheduled first stop instead. If they were on the same transport, they might have just waited around for a few hours, done a bit of sightseeing - who knows.

The planned trip to the Gulf states was for arms sales, and I imagine Mr C may have felt a little self-conscious about that, given what's been happening in places like Bahrain, not to mention the training we gave their police in how to handle demonstrators. I'm sure he'll not feel too hurt by any criticism, though. He seems to have a thick skin.

The scheduled trip, even according to the Guardian in another article wasn't just to sell arms, but to tout all kinds of stuff (including arms), but not to Egypt.

Personally, I wouldn't be selling arms to these types of nations, as I have previously said.

The SAS trained Libya's presidential guard people, under the PM'ship of Gordon Brown, TB also sucked up to various dictators and despots, as did various tories before them.

I just think that there's more than enough to have a go at DC and the rest for than the Guardian's (and others') spurious inferences that it was terrible and underhand etc. that some reps from the arms industry who were on a plane that was essentially diverted to Egypt, were on the plane - In other words it's the spurious implication that the UK was trying to sell arms to Egypt, this week, that I have a problem with - Why not just have a go for selling arms to all kinds of loons, rather than make veiled accusations that don't stand up from the evidence available.

There's also a seperate issue, which seems to go along the lines of we shouldn't sell "crowd control" kit to places where it will be used against their own people to oppress protest and democracy etc..

Well we sell it to our Police forces, and they use it against students, and various other protestors, when they really shouldn't.

So should we just not make any of this kind of stuff - body armour, shields, tear gas, rubber bullets, batons etc?

Or if that's alright, what about guns? should we disarm the army and the police marksmen? or is that OK.

What about larger weapons, helicopters....and so on. Where do you draw the line? "flowers in the hair and weed - no arms at all for anyone" which is beyond naive, or make and equip our forces with the best kit we can to allow them to do the role we ask of them....but then that doesn't make the defence sector nearly so "evil" which is how many see it and approach it.

There's hypocracy and manipulation of stories on both sides.

[Gringo]

There's also a seperate issue, which seems to go along the lines of we shouldn't sell "crowd control" kit to places where it will be used against their own people to oppress protest and democracy etc..

A simpler question would be in what situation is it possible to sell '"crowd control" kit' where it won't be used 'against their own people to oppress protest and democracy etc.'. All this gear is for the purpose of oppression.

[carlitobrigante]

worrying now to see Gaddafi still has a grip on things. At one stage i thought he was going to be toppled any minute. Now he seems to have Triploi on lockdown, plenty of militia still doing his bidding. Will be a civil war no doubt before he goes for good. shame.

Ive just watched Hagues press conference and Camerons Cariro and Kuwaiti speechs and i have to say im liking the responses from Cameron and Hague on all this. Im no fan of the conservatives, but for some reason I feel much more confident with these guys handling our foreign policy than Blair and Brown.