The Arab Spring and "the War on Terror"

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, Xann said:

...You carry more bombs! .....Liam Fox being the upstanding guy that he is, he won't push it through will he?..

There are only so many weapon stations on an aircraft. Lighter stores doesn't automatically equate to carrying more of them. Something can be more effective by being more accurate missing less and causing fewer casualties.

No, he won't. He can't.

 

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, peterms said:

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...

That twitter thread doesn't say what you say it says. It doesn't even show what the tweeters say it shows.

[Xann]

Just now, blandy said:

There are only so many weapon stations on an aircraft. Lighter stores doesn't automatically equate to carrying more of them. Something can be more effective by being more accurate missing less and causing fewer casualties.

No, he won't. He can't.

So what's going on your central hardpoint since you've saved 6000 lb on the wings - Ice cream dispenser?

Brexit goes through and trade deficit tanks - Putting money on no Saudi Deal? Only if Corbyn's in?

 

[VILLAMARV]

So I suppose we should just stop selling Arms and encouraging conflict around the world should we? What are you all? Brexiteers? are you trying to bankrupt the country and cause food shortages and brownouts or something? Don't understand how the world/economy/money/real world works. Over what 'Morals'? 'Seemed like a good idea at the time'? 'Just don't think it's right'?

Morons

etc.

[blandy]

8 minutes ago, Xann said:

what's going on your central hardpoint since you've saved 6000 lb on the wings - Ice cream dispenser?

Brexit goes through and trade deficit tanks - Putting money on no Saudi Deal? Only if Corbyn's in?

Jack's new wage packet? 

Only if Corbyn's in? Sadly (or not, I dunno) even with the absolute worst, most inept, divided, incompetent, objectionable tory government ever, Corbyn still doesn't look like getting in. 

[peterms]

7 hours ago, blandy said:

That twitter thread doesn't say what you say it says. It doesn't even show what the tweeters say it shows.

Questions, always questions.

 

[blandy]

29 minutes ago, peterms said:

Questions, always questions.

Questions are easy. Answers harder to find.  The most difficult thing is to resist temptation to jump to conclusions, perhaps?

[peterms]

15 minutes ago, blandy said:

Questions are easy. Answers harder to find.  The most difficult thing is to resist temptation to jump to conclusions, perhaps?

Yes.  This is where answers to questions are helpful, in forming a basis for arriving at (rather than jumping to) conclusions.

The questions Mr Wellings asks are reasonable, relevant, and important.  The story, with quoted sources, provides answers.

Do you think the answers, and conclusions, are wrong?  And if so, why?

[Jareth]

I had my wife discussing Burkhas because BoJo did a katie hopkins. Meanwhile we support war in Yemen. I don't care what it takes, but we need a Labour government now, opposed to war.

[peterms]

10 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I had my wife discussing Burkhas because BoJo did a katie hopkins. Meanwhile we support war in Yemen. I don't care what it takes, but we need a Labour government now, opposed to war.

On the burka, niqab, hijab issue, I thought this was quite good.

On the rather more important issue of Yemen, incidents like today may help to explain (not excuse) why people will strap explosives to themselves and walk on to a bus or a tube.  The longer we are complicit in these war crimes, the more we bring the war home to our doorstep.  And we are deeply, criminally complicit.

[blandy]

36 minutes ago, peterms said:

Yes.  This is where answers to questions are helpful, in forming a basis for arriving at (rather than jumping to) conclusions.

The questions Mr Wellings asks are reasonable, relevant, and important.  The story, with quoted sources, provides answers.

Do you think the answers, and conclusions, are wrong?  And if so, why?

I think the answers are wholly speculative. I don’t have the necessary information to reach a position of reasonable certainty either way. I have views on the likelihood of professional U.K. armed forces standards being adhered to, but they’re just views, and and to an extent distanced experience. I have views on the likelihood, for example of political (U.K.) instruction to “never mind all that” and the likely response. U.timately I only know what I know.

and you? Do you think the answers, and conclusions, are right?  And if so, why?

and to add, where I’m sure we agree, is that what happened is utterly horrific and has to stop.

[peterms]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think the answers are wholly speculative. I don’t have the necessary information to reach a position of reasonable certainty either way. I have views on the likelihood of professional U.K. armed forces standards being adhered to, but they’re just views, and and to an extent distanced experience. I have views on the likelihood, for example of political (U.K.) instruction to “never mind all that” and the likely response. U.timately I only know what I know.

and you? Do you think the answers, and conclusions, are right?  And if so, why?

and to add, where I’m sure we agree, is that what happened is utterly horrific and has to stop.

As the Saudi answers are damaging to them and their cause, I'm inclined to believe them more than if they were supportive to their cause, in that I can't see a motive or a benefit from lying.  Assuming the Telegraph has reported them accurately.

I have no experience or first hand knowledge of how the armed forces operate, thanks be to the lord, though I'm sure the usual social pressures of solidarity, groupthink and so on will mean they are at least no less inclined than the average to look the other way when members of the group break a rule set by a distant authority.  I suppose the very deliberate inculcation of the importance of discipline and rhe group sticking together will mean they are more prone to lying in defence of the group.  It would be astonishing if it were otherwise.

So, yeah, I reckon our lads were complicit in murdering kids, today.

[blandy]

11 hours ago, peterms said:

This is where answers to questions are helpful, in forming a basis for arriving at (rather than jumping to) conclusions.

 

10 hours ago, peterms said:

I have no experience or first hand knowledge of how the armed forces operate...[yet] I'm sure the usual social pressures of solidarity, groupthink and so on will mean they are at least no less inclined than the average to look the other way when members of the group break a rule set by a distant authority.  I suppose the very deliberate inculcation of the importance of discipline and rhe group sticking together will mean they are more prone to lying in defence of the group.  It would be astonishing if it were otherwise.yeah, I reckon our lads were complicit in murdering kids, today.

I see.

It's fine by the way, to jump to conclusions on an internet messageboard. It's human, particularly when having seen film of traumatised, bleeding children.

I jumped to my own conclusions, too. Though different from yours. My jumped to conclusion would be around regard for life being different in Saudi culture than UK culture, around sectarianism and nationalism, around the potential for a pilot or weapons officer in an aircraft to not follow through with all applicable procedures to avoid wrongly targetting civilians in a school bus, or faith in a God that will mean that His wishes are followed...

But they're just uninformed jumping to conclusion things too. Like I said "I think the answers are wholly speculative. I don’t have the necessary information to reach a position of reasonable certainty"

[tonyh29]

23 hours ago, Jareth said:

I had my wife discussing Burkhas because BoJo did a katie hopkins. Meanwhile we support war in Yemen. I don't care what it takes, but we need a Labour government now, opposed to war.

Just like the last labour government

 

[peterms]

On 10/08/2018 at 09:47, blandy said:

. My jumped to conclusion would be around regard for life being different in Saudi culture than UK culture, around sectarianism and nationalism, around the potential for a pilot or weapons officer in an aircraft to not follow through with all applicable procedures to avoid wrongly targetting civilians in a school bus, or faith in a God that will mean that His wishes are followed... 

If that were the perception of the MoD of the culture and ethos of the people we sell weapons to, coupled with the copious evidence of misuse on a vast scale, and indiscriminate murder, we shouldn't  sell them.

We have stronger controls on the sale of kitchen knives.

.

[peterms]

On 10/08/2018 at 22:04, tonyh29 said:

Just like the last labour government

 

As opposed to a tory government whose leading figures personally profit from mass murder...

 

[peterms]

Now that the appalling John Bolton has issued the latest "red line" ultimatum about CW attacks, we can  count down the hours until the White Helmets film the next staged sarin/chlorine/novichok attack.  No doubt it is in preparation right now, perhaps trying to avoid the more obvious errors of their earlier efforts.

[blandy]

Yer man Craig or one of his echo chamber been reading Russian Defence Ministry’s tweets again?

which as others have pointed out translates as “Assad’s gonna use CWs again, shortly”

The fog of war, eh?

[peterms]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

Yer man Craig or one of his echo chamber been reading Russian Defence Ministry’s tweets again?

A press statement by the Russian defence ministry has been reported by Associated Press, eg here.  I don't think the Guardian has covered it, though.

Also reporting that the US has moved two ships with cruise missiles into position for a strike.

Quote

By Associated Press

August 25 at 6:49 AM

MOSCOW — Russia’s Defense Ministry says that militants in a rebel-controlled province of Syria are preparing a chemical weapons attack.

The ministry in a statement on Saturday quoted unnamed sources saying that the Levant Liberation Committee is preparing an attack against civilians in the northwestern Idlib province to blame it on the Syrian government.

The Russian military cited its sources alleging that several containers with chlorine had been delivered to a local town and later taken to a nearby village. The Defense Ministry also claimed that a private British contractor is helping the rebels to stage the attack.

The Russian statement comes several days after U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton warned Syria’s government against using chemical weapons and vowed a tough response if that happens.

 

[blandy]

51 minutes ago, peterms said:

A press statement by the Russian defence ministry has been reported by Associated Press, eg here.  I don't think the Guardian has covered it, though.

Also reporting that the US has moved two ships with cruise missiles into position for a strike.

It's confusing isn't it. Both the USA and Russia seemingly are aware of an imminent CW attack in Syria. Russia is putting out that Rebels are gonna do it, and the US that Assad is going to do it.

Who to believe, if anyone? Do we Trust Trump or Putin or neither?

The OPCW did an interim report on the previous attack, finding 

Quote

The results show that no organophosphorous nerve agents or their degradation products were detected in the environmental samples or in the plasma samples taken from alleged casualties. Along with explosive residues, various chlorinated organic chemicals were found in samples from two sites, for which there is full chain of custody. Work by the team to establish the significance of these results is on-going. The FFM team will continue its work to draw final conclusions.

So it looks like there was an attack (rather than the initial line that there wasn't, and it was all a fake). They also found that at the sites Syria said there was rebel CW facilities, there was no evidence of this at all.

Quote

Based on the equipment and chemicals observed during the two on-site visits to the warehouse and the facility suspected by the authorities of the Syrian Arab Republic of producing chemical weapons, there was no indication of either facility being involved in the production of chemical warfare agents.

So the last one - no evidence that rebels produced CWs as Syria alleged, No evidence of Nerve agent use (they check for this regardless), but chlorinated organic chemicals (*Dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, chloral hydrate, trichlorophenol, trinitrotoluene, chloride etc.) were found (yet to be finally determined to be Chlorine gas residue, or not). Evidence of Cylinders etc., which contradicts Russian statements of "no evidence". They also said the Syrians denied them access to some places they wanted to visit and collect samples etc.

Quote

During the visit to Location 2, Syrian Arab Republic representatives did not provide the access requested by the FFM team to some apartments within the building, which were closed at the time. The Syrian Arab Republic representatives stated that they did not have the authority to force entry into the locked apartments.

https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/S_series/2018/en/s-1645-2018_e_.pdf

Trump might want one of his "look over there" distractions, Assad might think "nothing's come of the last time I did it", Russia might think now's a good time, with the West turning more in on itself to sow some more potential for discord...who knows. Then there's all the barmpots like Vanessa Beeley and the Assad?Putin apologists to factor in.

What a mess...