HanoiVillan Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 15 minutes ago, peterms said: Thread here with some interesting comments. Very interesting. Thanks for posting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 True. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted April 21, 2018 Share Posted April 21, 2018 Something afoot in Saudi Arabia. Heavy gunfire around the palace. King evacuated. Some speculating a coup or Houthi attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 hour ago, blandy said: To me direct involvement in the killing would be dropping bombs or firing guns, rather than having sold Tornado bombers or maintenance contracts years ago. Maybe the U.K. is selling bombs to the Saudis which they drop on Yemen? I don’t know, but could quite believe it. Perhaps that nice Jeremy Corbyn will end all wars when he gets in. Let’s hope so. Quote Kate Osamor, the shadow international development secretary, denounced an agreement signed between the two countries on Friday, as the kingdom remains embroiled in a bloody bombing campaign in Yemen that has killed thousands of civilians and precipitated a humanitarian crisis. The $140 million deal is aimed at creating vital infrastructure in drought and conflict-stricken countries, but the was greeted with fury by opposition MPs over Saudi Arabia's role in the Yemen conflict. "Theresa May implied she would lobby Mohammad bin Salman to stop bombing civilians and end the use of starvation as a weapon of war," Osamor told the Guardian newspaper. "Over 22 million Yemeni lives depend on permanent, full access for aid, food and fuel in Yemen. Instead, she has won no concessions and simply handed on a plate to Saudi Arabia a new humanitarian partnership and an endorsement from DfID [the Department for International Development], the world's best aid agency. WATCH: Red carpet welcome for Saudi's crown prince in UK (3:17) "It will whitewash Saudi Arabia's reputation and role in the war, and it is a national disgrace," Osamor said. Osamor's comments came as Downing Street also announced plans to sell 48 Eurofighter Typhoon jets to Riyadh. Al Jazeera March 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 16 minutes ago, Xann said: Al Jazeera March 2018 I don't quite get your point. A humanitarian deal "creating vital infrastructure in drought and conflict-stricken countries" is a bad thing, now? - because it's an example of doing the opposite of directly being involved in killing people or do you mean "Theresa May... lobby[ing]... Mohammad bin Salman to stop bombing civilians and end the use of starvation as a weapon of war," is a bad thing? because again, while it might be a bit feeble, and something of a fig leaf it's not "directly....killing people" it's asking for the opposite. or do you mean that (potentially) selling fighter aircraft in the future is a bad thing? - if so I accept your view as legitimate. Though whether these as yet unbuilt fighter aircraft are directly being involved in killing people right now... It'll be the Tonkers, the last of which was built and sold yonks ago, that will be dropping bombs. Not Typhoons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 38 minutes ago, blandy said: It'll be the Tonkers, the last of which was built and sold yonks ago, that will be dropping bombs. Not Typhoons. You didn't read on? Quote Since the start of the war in Yemen, the UK has approved arms export licences to Saudi Arabia worth $6.3bn, including the sale of Tornado aircraft, tanks, armoured vehicles, grenades, missiles and bombs. The Saudis already operate 72 Typhoons from a first batch of jets ordered in 2007, despite previous concerns raised by human rights groups and anti-war campaigners. Why are we sending THEM aid? A non profit NGO could have used the funds (on kit or to screen for sex pests). Too many similarities to the US overseas aid budget deal. The bulk of which goes to Israel, who then spend it on US weapons, obscenely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 (edited) Edit: Nevermind, I should have read the last page for some context. Edited August 9, 2018 by Davkaus Removed bollocks :) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Xann said: You didn't read on? Quote It's wrong about Tornado sales. Don't believe everything you read on the internet. They stopped being built nigh on 20 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 3 minutes ago, blandy said: It's wrong about Tornado sales. Don't believe everything you read on the internet. They stopped being built nigh on 20 years ago. Capability upgrade as part of the 'care' package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Xann said: Why are we sending THEM aid? A non profit NGO could have used the funds (on kit or to screen for sex pests Good question. We send aid to all sorts of places. It's generally used, as I understand it, to help people who need help. There's certainly a good argument, mostly made by the right, to say we shouldn't send aid to nations who are rich enough to help their own citizens, spend it in the UK instead. The flip side is well, people are suffering, help them. ANd also you're right that (again people mostly on the right) want to link aid more to trade, and it seems highly likely that this happens to an extent already on a nudge nudge basis. Slightly OT though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 minute ago, Xann said: Capability upgrade as part of the 'care' package. That's more like it, not "including the sale of Tornado aircraft", but software and hardware updates were contracted a good while back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 3 minutes ago, blandy said: That's more like it, not "including the sale of Tornado aircraft", but software and hardware updates were contracted a good while back. So it can carry more destructive bombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, Xann said: So it can carry more destructive bombs. I don't think so, but haven't looked into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 24 minutes ago, blandy said: I don't think so, but haven't looked into it. Paveway IV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 13 minutes ago, Xann said: Paveway IV How much more "destructive" is a (500 lb) Paveway IV than the (2000 lb) Paveway III it replaced ? approximately. There's a clue in there, if you look closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 It goes deeper underground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tonyh29 Posted August 9, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 minute ago, Xann said: It goes deeper underground. As if been being bombed wasn’t bad enough it plays Jamiroquai to torture the poor sods as well 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 9, 2018 Moderator Share Posted August 9, 2018 23 minutes ago, Xann said: It goes deeper underground. Let me summarise. First the article said there were Tornado aircraft sales to Saudi, when there weren't. Then it was upgrades to software and hardware which allowed the Tornados to carry "more destructive" weapons, Then it was , well the weapons might be smaller and less destructive, but they can penetrate deeper (which is true, and they're also more accurate, meaning fewer casualties). OK next question. How many Paveway IV do the Saudis have at the moment? My understanding is they don't have any (because the West wouldn't let them, due to their (RSAF) lax targetting efforts). But in a way this is so far off topic, as to be irrelevant. My point would be and is, that I agree definitely more should be done to disaude the parties - KSA, Iran, Houthis etc. from the killing and horrors in Yemen and elsewhere. It is also that not everything you read in the news about "our" (UK) part in things is accurate and often it is overstated by both the media and people (rightly) opposed to killing and bloodshed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 1 minute ago, blandy said: Let me summarise. First the article said there were Tornado aircraft sales to Saudi, when there weren't. Then it was upgrades to software and hardware which allowed the Tornados to carry "more destructive" weapons, Then it was , well the weapons might be smaller and less destructive, but they can penetrate deeper (which is true, and they're also more accurate, meaning fewer casualties). OK next question. How many Paveway IV do the Saudis have at the moment? My understanding is they don't have any (because the West wouldn't let them, due to their (RSAF) lax targetting efforts). But in a way this is so far off topic, as to be irrelevant. My point would be and is, that I agree definitely more should be done to disaude the parties - KSA, Iran, Houthis etc. from the killing and horrors in Yemen and elsewhere. It is also that not everything you read in the news about "our" (UK) part in things is accurate and often it is overstated by both the media and people (rightly) opposed to killing and bloodshed. HA! The bomb weight goes down - You carry more bombs! - When did the following generation of anything get less effective? So we're not giving the Saudis Paveway IV - Let's f***ing see shall we? Liam Fox being the upstanding guy that he is, he won't push it through will he? It's only Off Topic as far as you've taken it by saying there's no direct influence from the UK causing misery Worldwide - Clearly horseshit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted August 9, 2018 Share Posted August 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, blandy said: Let me summarise. First the article said there were Tornado aircraft sales to Saudi, when there weren't. Then it was upgrades to software and hardware which allowed the Tornados to carry "more destructive" weapons, Then it was , well the weapons might be smaller and less destructive, but they can penetrate deeper (which is true, and they're also more accurate, meaning fewer casualties). OK next question. How many Paveway IV do the Saudis have at the moment? My understanding is they don't have any (because the West wouldn't let them, due to their (RSAF) lax targetting efforts). But in a way this is so far off topic, as to be irrelevant. My point would be and is, that I agree definitely more should be done to disaude the parties - KSA, Iran, Houthis etc. from the killing and horrors in Yemen and elsewhere. It is also that not everything you read in the news about "our" (UK) part in things is accurate and often it is overstated by both the media and people (rightly) opposed to killing and bloodshed. There's a brief twitter thread by Louis Allday about the involvement of BAe systems with the Saudis, pointing out that there is continuing and close co-operation in the attacks on Yemen, including recruiting people to do the killing, and that our armed forces are training the Saudis in attacks. And something from Mark Curtis pointing out that these arms sales are illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts