Blogs Coffee House

Now that Iraq really is threatened by jihadists, should we intervene?

12 June 2014

12:37 PM

12 June 2014

12:37 PM

The war on terror has gone not necessarily to our advantage. For the second time in a dozen years the land of Abraham has been invaded by a partly-British army, although this time it is composed not of regular soldiers but of bearded lunatics from Crawley.

The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, an Islamist offshoot so extreme that even al-Qaeda thinks they’ve taken things a bit too far, now controls a huge swathe of Syria and Iraq, roughly in the region of 40,000 square miles, or 4.0 Wales on the International Wales Scale. That makes Sunnistan larger than an independent Scotland and with a great deal more oil.

[Alt-Text]


The failure of the Americans to nation-build was epitomised by the fact that a US-trained Iraqi army of 30,000 fled from just 800 ISIS militants in Mosul. Defeatist armies tend to reflect a society with low levels of cohesion and conversely high levels of clannishness and corruption, problems which mar the artificial states created by the French and British after the fall of the Turkish Empire. (An interesting theory of why nation-building in the Middle East doesn’t work was provided by Steve Sailer’s ‘Cousin Marriage Conundrum’ before the US invasion.)

Two months after that article appeared the Coalition went ahead and invaded Iraq; and never has a war been prosecuted and, without actually being lost, all its objectives being not just not achieved but actually reversed. It’s almost like we started a war with Imperial Germany in 1914 and ended up with Nazi Germany in 1918. I feel for the families of those who were killed in that doomed expedition, but most of all I feel for the poor people of Iraq, who have endured so much and have more suffering ahead of them.

For the situation now is extremely alarming, not just for the Iraqis but for the wider region. If ISIS attacks Kirkuk it could bring about all-out war with the Iraqi Kurds, with the implications that has for the wider Kurdish region. Iran is bound to feel a need to intervene; and as ISIS has taken hostage 76 Turkish citizens, Turkey, and by extension NATO, may feel the right to act. The Iraqi government has already called for American drone support, but any politician in Britain who suggests this great idea of ‘liberating Iraq’ [cue Dr Evil air quotes] is likely to have one or two hurdles persuading the public.

Ironically, unlike in 2003, Iraq really is now threatened by dangerous extremists with links to the 9/11 perpetrators and who pose a risk to the region. But as a wise man once said, ‘fool me once, shame on – shame on you. Fool me – you can’t get fooled again’.

More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.




Show comments
  • poran

    We would be interested (though not very) to know which planet you are broadcasting from.otomatik kapı Otomatik Kapılar

  • bita

    luckly she manages to hail a black cab in no time and narrowly makes it to city airport for her flight back to holland .
    درب اتوماتیککرکره برقی

  • shiva

    Cabbies were the first to use and embrace the app technology .
    درب اتوماتیککرکره برقیاجرای نمای ساختمان

  • Charles Hatvani

    There is something unholy in the soil of the Middle East. People living there have been fighting each other long before the Arabs, hundreds and perhaps thousands of years before them. Wish there was some everything resistant strain of vicious fleas living only there, feeding exclusively on human blood…

  • Ken

    No. Islam must sort out it’s own problems.

  • lookout

    The only way to win a war is to win it totally, Gen. MacArthur used nuclear weapons to destroy Japan and then made their religious and civil and military leaders publicly renounce their religion. This saved ten years of foxhole to foxhole fighting and thousands of lives. I don’t advocate nuclear weapons usage but the book of Isiah chapter 17 verse 1 does prophecy the total destruction of Damascus

  • Colin

    hello?

  • colliemum

    Amazing, how short the memory of the hack pack is.
    The line doesn’t go from the Bush/Blair iraq war, dear Ed – the line goes from ‘Arab Spring’ Egypt (you all loved it, until Morsi got toppled by Sisi, and never mind the killing of the Egyptian Christians), over ‘Arab Spring” Libya ( just a bot of bombing and killing Gaddafi, and then everything will be rosy, right?) directly to Syria (gotta get rid of bad Assad because Qatar needed to build their pipeline through Syria, and the b*stard wouldn’t let them!), where the jihadis congregated and where ISI came into being.
    Last year, government and hack pack even wanted to send in the Army, because Assad had to be toppled. That christians were killed and tortured – one sigh and then off to the next ‘crisis’.
    No – this is not some unforeseeable event, this has been brewing for some time, only all the clever clogs in the FO and the meejah have been spending the last six months on poor little Ukraine and bad big Russia, and how Putin must be ‘punished’.
    Well done all round – and you, Ed, better not try your hand at foreign politics.

  • Neil Gardner

    Looks like some of the friendly freedom fighters we’ve been funding in Syria just spilled over into Iraq.

  • John_Page

    Intervene? What with?

  • Fenman

    Telmachus, Campbell had Scarlett ‘firm up’ the original reoprt changing a possible to a probale , for which both shd go to prison.

  • CraigStrachan

    The US-led invasion broke Iraq. Fixing it is simply beyond the capability of the US or British militaries.

  • Tony_E

    I don’t think there is a feasible or sensible intervention on the table now. At least not in Iraq itself, or Syria where all hope of any solution has long since been given up.

    We have to look outside to see which other countries are attempting to manipulate the situation. We might be fortunate in our adversaries here, because both Iran and Saudi Arabia are perfectly capable of over reaching themselves and eventually importing the same unrest they are promoting elsewhere. There is a possibility that the fight will engulf all of them, but eventually end in them finding more sustainable borders where the populations are more homogenous – Sunni and Shia rather than deeply mixed in badly drawn boundaries. But I don’t expect it to happen quickly and without massive loss of life.

    Maybe though, it will be a draw to those who wish to fight, rather than fight their battles in Europe.

    In ten years, we could be looking at a very different political make up in the region.

  • Fenman

    The USAAF has ahuge base in Qatar and the RAF a small one in Bahrain, whihc they used to periodically bomb Saddam’s Iraq, so if they wan the uSand the UK cd easily fly up and bomb ISIS which has no planes, just as it used to. But of these 2 little protectorates are Sunni. not that the US shd worry as they only exist due to the US and UK. BUT NO FEET ON THE GROUND. Let the corrupt Iraqis do that for themselves.

  • Steve Pocock

    In a few months the ‘great powers’ are to walk away from Afghanistan ‘again’. Just as order appears to be taking hold. It would have taken 30 years to create a generation that might start to understand living in an ordered tolerant community. That will be terminated and because of the recent fractured nature of the country it will all be lost within a couple of years just as Iraq is now to be dismembered. Those who support the withdrawel are as culpable as those that initiated the invasions.

  • MirthaTidville

    Now maybe the stupidest of the stupid, or Bush,Bliar and Rumsfeld if you like, must acknowledge that Saddam,although far from perfect or even reasonable, at least knew how to keep the lid on things and what would we give to have that stabililty now. In case Dave starts to feel a bit smug, ditto Gaddafi and Libya…One thing the politicos never do……….is learn

    • Mike

      It is the naivety of all modern western leaders who think they can solve internecine strife or civil wars by forcing democracy on undemocratic cultures.

      We’ve seen the failures of Bush, Blair & Rumsfeld and now the opposite failures from Obama, Clinton & Cameron. Our western leaders want to mix it to create a legacy for themselves rather than ensure the safety of their own citizens.

      • MirthaTidville

        exactemont mon amis

    • Lamia

      Fine. So what do you suggest now, in June 2014? Perhaps ISIS can be stopped by… you criticising the idiots who screwed up Iraq in 2003. Somehow I think not.

  • The Masked Marvel

    This is a smashing foreign policy success for Obama, the Left, and all those in the middle and on the Right who opposed the Iraq war(s) in the first place, regardless of political orientation. A smashing success. Obama deliberately walked away from working out a military support agreement with the Iraqi Government, and deliberately left a gaping vacuum, all while helpfully giving a timeline to those waiting to take advantage.

    Result: sexy violence for the media, and affirmation for those who always hated Blair and Bush for removing Saddam Hussein. Two different wars had been won in Iraq, slow progress after the errors of the early years was being made towards a reasonably democratic state, and at last another possible ally for the West. That was given away, all so Obama could have his “I ended the war” certificate for his legacy, and so those who were always against it could now say that it was always going to turn out this way and put blame back on Bush and Blair.

    A smashing success for Obama’s ideology, and for those who always opposed the war in Iraq.

    • HookesLaw

      Well yes you are broadly right. Obama further not only moved precipitously away from Iraq, he jumped into Afghanistan. Our own entry in to Afghanistan was sadly not well conceived or implimented, with the result that here again we may be leaving too soon, although advisors and support does seem to be being kept in place.

      • The Masked Marvel

        He originally campaigned on Iraq being wrong and Afghanistan being right, so had to do something like that. The aftermath in both countries was handled badly, plenty of blame to go round, but that’s 20/20 hindsight, not really what the “I told you so” crowd are saying.

    • Lagos1

      Good comment. it amazes me that so many people are now saying “at least Saddam Hussein held it together” as if he would still be sitting comfortably in power had Iraq not been invaded. Lets not forget, Assad was cut from the same cloth as Saddam, and his attempts at holding things together are hardly pretty.

      • The Masked Marvel

        Saddam would most likely be dead from cancer by now, with the wonderful stable paradise everyone keeps claiming he ran split between his two lunatic sons, never mind other forces who would have been moving in to fill the vacuum. Things would most likely have been much worse. Then again, most of those against the whole thing don’t actually care about Iraqi lives, so they’ll still be against it no matter what.

  • Mr Grumpy

    Whilst appreciating that swathes are almost invariably huge, I would contend that 4.0 Wales is a rather moderate swathe. Thanks for keeping us smiling, Ed, it’s essential for our sanity.

    • HookesLaw

      I think Mr West’s sarcasm hides a poor argument.

      • Mr Grumpy

        Which is?

  • Donafugata

    And if a massive number of congenital nutters wasn’t bad enough, they now have access to all the weaponry their tiny minds could dream of, courtesy of the regime changers.

  • CharlietheChump

    Control of 40,000 square miles by 15,000 ISIS forces (highest estimate I’ve seen) does not equate to control. What it means is they wander from hamlet to village to town beheading a few who bump into them and then piss off looking for a glorious martyrdom somewhere else.

    There is absolutely no stomach in the UK for any more adventures and we have no army or air force left after previous – and indeed further – cuts.

    Do not mention “action” by the UK in foreign affairs, we don’t do that anymore.

    • HookesLaw

      Well you are right about the numbers and the measure of control. This episode has a long way to play out yet. But post our withdrawal east of Suez (and what a mistake that might be considered – please discuss, remembering to put your name clearly on the top of your paper) we have never had the ability to intervene, certainly not unilaterally.
      From our domestic security point of view that is setting up of terrorist training camps like those before 911we can bomb them if needs be.
      It is of course absurd to say we have no army or air force left, we do. But as parliament, led by opportunist labour, have shownshown there is no will to use our not inconsiderable air power.

      These episodes show that the best use of our army is mainly to develop larger and stronger special forces which can achieve a lot in these situations.

  • Mike

    One can try to apportion blame on the west for this war as with other fighting in the middle eastern countries but Islam looks like it is now going through the same blood letting that Christianity went through 500 years ago.

    I still believe we were probably wrong in getting involved in Iraq previously BUT that still wouldn’t have stopped the fighting in Syria, Libya and Iraq & Afghanistan as until Islam drags itself into the 21st century nothing will change. We could have left Saddam Hussein alone to crack down on his Islamic extremists but we decided to intervene and sooner or later this religious powder keg was going to blow and it has all across the region.

    As with all genocidal wars, its usually religion that is at the bottom of it and this is no exception. In geographical terms, its an area as large as the Catholic – Protestant wars of the middle ages where the UK & Holland fought against Catholicism in France, Spain & Italy. We prevailed in the end halting the takeover of Europe by Papal rule and over the following centuries, the power of the Vatican faded away by itself.

    In the 21st century it isn’t practical or possible to fight and win a selective war against the extreme forms of Islam and the ONLY solution to protect the west is to draw a line in the sand (literally) to contain this extremism in the way the Iron curtain worked in the 60’s. Europe and America need to protect themselves from within and outside against these threats rather than passively sitting by and letting the radicals takeover the world. Let these religious killers have their part of the world and let them be defeated from within by their own people when they decide they’ve had enough but in the west, we must crack down on extremist Islam and cut it out like the cancer it is.

    The real challenge now for the west is for our leaders to wake up to reality, protect the west whilst this genocide continues and stop letting political correctness open our borders to the cancer of extreme Islam. As far as the middle east its a no win situation and our leaders must accept this fact and work with it instead of fooling themselves and trying to fool us !

    • HookesLaw

      Yes, drags itself into the 21st century… the 20th would do.
      The best way for this to happen is democracy. The sort of religious zealotry we see harks back to out own Civil War, so we can see how far they have to go. We need to keep pushing them.

      • Mike

        We can’t push them as that doesn’t work.

        Its like trying to teach your kids whats right or wrong & good or bad. At 5-18 years of age they think they know best and you’re an old fart who knows nothing however when they leave, get married and have kids of their own they wake up to the realities of life. I’m sure most parents posting here would agree with me that their kids once grown up have confessed we were right and they were wrong. Most theologians would probably agree that its the same with christianity through the ages.

        Islam however is still like a young spoiled brat. You can’t tell it what is right, wrong, good or bad as it has to figure it out for itself. The sad part is by the time it has figured it out, many more millions of Muslims will have died needlessly.

  • WatTylersGhost

    Mr West, If you want to saddle up and ride off to Iraq, go right ahead. But leave our sons and daughters out of this one please.

  • swatnan

    Its tempting, but those that the Gods do not favour will destroy themselves, with little help from us. These Islamic fanatics only understand one thing, violence, so we may have to go back to the days of ‘hung drawn and quartering’ and ‘heads on spikes’. There must be zero tolerance to show that the international community will not put up with their kind of nonsense any more.

  • Kitty MLB

    This just proves the point. Regardless of what the West do, the Middle East have always has wars and always will. Its their wars and we should not have sacrificed
    the lives of our brave men and woman for that. As well as using our military equipment.
    Blair started all this, Bush wanted revenge and Blair just likes prancing on the world
    stage. As well as the fact he allegedly mislead parliament.
    All the problems we have today with that part of the world and those who live here
    from the middle east stems back to that war.

  • wycombewanderer

    They’re doing what they enjoy doing let them get on and slaughter each other and just enjoy the world cup and the test series which is what we enjoy doing.

  • RavenRandom

    You could not find a more perfect demonstration of the law of unintended consequence.

  • LadyDingDong

    The architects of many of our current problems with Islamism and terrorism were Bush and Blair. In fact Blair created two fronts against the UK by allowing the radicalisation of our British-born Muslim youths, and by importing hundreds of thousands more from the Horn of Africa, North Africa and Pakistan whose value systems are completely inimical to our Christian ethos. Now the inevitable outcome of Blair and Campbell’s lies are being borne by the poor innocents in Iraq and we hear again the idiot voices of those who express ‘something must be one’ in an attempt to get us to spend more blood and treasure in a war that we must stay well out of. The thirteen-hundred year, internecine war between Shi’ite and Sunni has nothing to do with us and everything to do with Saudi Arabia and Iran. I must confess, the thought of these two odious regimes beating the heck out of each other is somewhat appealing, though the further disruption and death it would bring to this benighted region is not an attractive outcome. The millions of refugees that will result from this religious battle for a Caliphate will also no doubt spill over to us again, but this time we must refrain from importing more malcontents to add to Blair’s poisoned legacy.

    • Mike

      Our involvement in Iraq & Afghanistan may have acted as a catalyst for the current problems but it was going to kick off sooner or later.

      Just like Christianity and the wars between Protestants & Catholics in the middle ages, with Islamic countries, they have similar factions that were waiting for a chance to kill each other. Most religions need to go through a blood letting phase when two disparate groups are at each others throats and Islam is no different.

      Our mistake is getting in the middle of it by mistakenly trying to help out and keep an artificial peace when they have to work it out for themselves.

      • Tom M

        I like the notion that Islam is just “going through a phase” like other religions.
        The religious wars between Protestants and Catholics had a historical starting point and a historical end point. Islam had a starting point in the 7th century and has continued in the same vein ever since.
        How in heavens name can you draw comparisons like that?

        • Mike

          There are valid comparisons and valid differences, I accept that. Islam as you rightly said had a starting point but no end point yet as far as growing up into the 21st century but the real comparison I was drawing attention to was Sunni vs Shia with Catholic vs Protestant during times of religious conflict.

          Two factions of the same religion killing each other as seen with Christianity before and Islam now is no different. The only difference is the Islamic genocide is on going and involves more than just two groups to the point where the west doesn’t understand it and probably will never understand it. It is the nature of Islam that has allowed itself to be hijacked by militant groups with their own agenda when religion controls culture and culture ends up controlling government.

          Either through evolution or deliberate policies, Christianity in the west has been ‘neutered’ as far as causing wars or forcibly controlling & brain washing the people. Militant Islam as we see in Birmingham, is still trying to brain wash UK kids as the hard line option of war is not available (yet) to these extremist. It is as important to stop these people as it is to let Islam in the middle east destroy itself until it evolves into a passive religion.

          • Tom M

            “………It is the nature of Islam that has allowed itself to be hijacked by militant groups………” are you really saying that Islam is some naive entity that has been taken in by militant groups?

            If so I would refer you, again, to the history of that religious sect and it’s actions against many indigenous peoples across Europe and Asia. What they did then is no way different at all from what they are attempting today in Iraq. The people look the same, talk and act the same the only difference is their weapons. The prophet himself would approve of their actions and his only criticism would be to complain as to why it has taken them so long.

            • Mike

              I think the evidence speaks for itself.

              Saddam Hussein, although a brutal dictator cracked down on Islamic fanatics and kept the country relatively stable (for that region) before the west tried foolishly to bring democracy to that country.

              Almost every single Islamic country in that region has been taken over by extremists for the simple reason that when religion controls culture & government, the militants rule.

              We’ve seen it in Egypt and there’s been a massive push back by the military in Egypt against the radicals, Syria is in the middle of it right now and Iraq has almost capitulated to the extremists.

              More wars were fought over religion, more people have died over religion and more poverty has been caused by religion than any other cause. This includes Christianity as well, however Christianity had its power over people crushed centuries ago and the same needs to happen to Islam.

    • Tom M

      I agree with all of that except the point you make of radicalisation of British born Muslim youths. I submit that radicalisation is the normal state of Muslims. That it rests dormant occasionaly is due to the normal distribution of human nature. They have been radical ever since the 7th century, by any yardstick that would be decribed as a normal trait.

  • In2minds

    Intervene? Let’s sort out Birmingham schools first.

    • Kitty MLB

      We must not intervene. Look what happened the last time we intervened,
      we lost many soldiers so that Blair could prance around on the world stage.
      And it gave some a reason to attack us, we should stay out of other peoples wars.

      • girondas

        heartily agree with you.

      • HookesLaw

        There does not look to be a need to intervention, Kurdish forces have taken control of Kirkuk. It seems not inconceivable that they will then move against isis.
        Where this leaves Iraq is another matter, possibly a loose federation, but if in some way the Kurds save the Iraq governemts bacon then they will want something in return.

        • Kitty MLB

          I have just heard that Obama said the US
          might intervene . Hooky the middle east might
          be heading towards a Syria and Iraq terrorist
          superstate and we might all be heading towards
          WW3.

      • MirthaTidville

        Absolutely right Kitty. But this time we have to I`m afraid. The Tories have pretty much dismantled the armed forces, only yesterday they were reminded how far short the part time recruitment is, so this time Iraq must be left to burn

        • HookesLaw

          Our armed forces are not pretty well dismantled. Its absurd to say so. The cost of properly equipping a modern army is very large and we saw the problems of labour using our nominally undismantled army with inadequate equipment in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
          We had for instance a nominally undismantled Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft that in fact was not fit for purpose and leaking fuel and liquids all over the place until it blew up killing 14 people. The plane was 37 years old. The mod sacrificed safety to cut costs said the report.
          A Hercules was destroyed in Iraq with the loss of 10 lives because a bit of extra safety was not installed.
          This is without reference to needless deaths due to mines because of duff equipment.
          Under labour numbers and supposed capability were streched at the expense of proper back up.

          • Colonel Mustard

            Yes, no risk of flying accidents from dangerous aircraft carriers if we have no carriers and no aircraft to put on them. Think of the money that could be saved and diverted to Somalia or Bangladesh so that Spoonface can boast to his dinner party guests about how progressive he is.

          • saffrin

            And still your lot cut while at the same time search the World for unjustified conflicts to get involved in.
            How screwed would we be if Cameron had got his way and got us involved in Syria and the Ukraine?
            You really must be off your head if you think Cameron is any where near capable or competent.

          • MirthaTidville

            Of course Liebour sent them to war with poor equipment, that speaks for itself but our forces are dismantled under Dave..and that evidence speaks for itself..even the defence select committee amongst others have said so…dolt

        • MaggieL

          The Royal Navy has 40 Admirals and 260 Captains for just 19 warships. Do you think that’s sensible?

          • MirthaTidville

            Of course not, we must have many more warships

    • CO Jones

      Our only intervention should be to build a wall around it, and let them keep on doing what they’re doing.

  • William Haworth

    Soon there won’t be anyone left, in these areas, that the Jihadis don’t like. Which makes it into a massive free-fire zone, as far as I’m concerned.

    • nibs

      agreed.

  • nibs

    We should ally with Russia, Iran and Syria and defeat this scourge once and for all. That is, if Israel will give us permission. We’ve picked the wrong side.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Bit late to give Saddam his old job back.

    • helicoil

      All those WMD’s meant he had to go… oh, wait a minute.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        And Uday and Qusay have been laying low of late.

    • Donafugata

      At least Sadaam knew how to keep the lid on it, the same goes for Gadaafi.

      If the Lone Ranger and Tonto had to flex their muscle they should have hit Somalia, Eritrea and Yemen, not Iraq with its useful dictator.

      • Kitty MLB

        That’s a valid point. We don’t like these despots and try to remove them. But in reality their people are not like those in the West.
        Just who have we been defending .

  • HookesLaw

    War? How can a war go necessarily to our advantage when we that is the west are clearly not fighting it.
    Obama had already turned down several requests to bomb these terrorists in their bases long before they moved on Mosul.
    I am not sure how terrorists really control anything (except admittedly a few bank vaults) when over half a million people have fled before them.

    • Kitty MLB

      I am not a supporter of Obama but for once I agree with him.
      Just let them murder each other. They will regardless of what we do or
      don’t do anyway. They don’t value life like we do. And we must value the
      lives of our own soldiers. Too many have been sacrificed.

      • Donafugata

        As the Israelis say, “and may both sides win”.

        • Kitty MLB

          Indeed. Its a endless war and one we have suffered because of. We are living with the consequences, and maybe a little
          naïve in those days. Hopefully we are a lot more wise now.

      • HookesLaw

        Yes, this may well be an option, but ‘just let them murder each other’ is not a zero sum game. There are consequences, such as who wins in the end. We have long term interests in seeing a stable world, not least in oil rich strategic areas. Let’s not get carried away, the numbers of these fighters is not large, defeat is not inevitable… we need to chose our proxies.
        In this respect and as I have pointed out in an earlier reply, the Kurds now hold Kirkuk and may well now attack the ISIS people, the numbers of whom seem to be vague which leads me to think they are relatively small.
        The Iraqi army repulsed them at Samara.

        But back to my original point, Obama had an invite and an opportunity to strike but did not. There may be good reasons, like wanting the Iraqi govt to be more open and broad based, but the USA has fought hard for the concept of an Iraqi government and at the cusp of an important part of its existence it seems to have shrugged its shoulders. Hence my point about the fact that we are not actually fighting in this war so it cannot be said to have gone against our advantage. The not very clever use of this quote by Mr West was of course by the Japanese emperor after two of his major cities had been vapourised in nuclear blasts. Japan in this case had fought their stupid war to their last breath.

        • Mike

          Who cares who wins in the end as we just ostracize them like Soviet Russia and that worked for the west.

          More and more we’re becoming less dependent on the middle east for oil and once we’re self sufficient we can totally ignore them. They don’t produce technology or food and without oil revenues most of these countries will be worse off than Ethiopia for self sufficiency. Roll on that day for my kids future !

      • Mike

        Obama isn’t saying this, in fact he isn’t saying anything at all as he’s sitting on the fence. He may or may not like the idea of them killing each other but he’s been very quiet on the matter. Anyway, he’s got far too many other own goals at home to worry about over the VA scandal, Bergdahl and over reaching his authority with the prisoner swap, Benghazi and stuff like Obamacare (sorry Affordable Health Care).

  • anyfool

    If you want to stop all of these fanatics in their tracks, destroy Saudi Arabia, it and its fanatics are financing these wars.

    • telemachus

      Tell you what
      A few tactical nuclear weapons would do for these troublesome Johnnny Foreigners

      • girondas

        It was your lot that invaded the Middle East sonny, and don’t you forget it

        • telemachus

          I remember enthusiastic support from the opposition

          • RavenRandom

            Because like the public they were lied to.

            • telemachus

              The public were hung ho to give Saddam a bloody nose
              Whether or not

              • girondas

                “The public were hung ho to give Saddam a bloody nose
                Whether or not”

                Only because your party lied to them. People were naive in those days telemachus, they didn’t believe that your party would lie about something as important as war, but they know better now don’t they.

              • RavenRandom

                No they weren’t gung ho. Even you know that. We believed what our government told us. It was deemed necessity not any sort of gung ho… frankly that’s just insulting to the public.

              • sir_graphus

                The public were not gung ho at all. At least a million marched in protest. I don’t know anyone who thought invasion a good idea, with or without WMD; we all forecast a confused Islamist guerilla quagmire, and we were right.

              • Colonel Mustard

                Gung ho is not good enough. Neither is invasion. The key success factor should have been a successful transition to an effective civil administration and that was stuffed up by the US insistence on sacking an army of potential guerillas.

                The whole thing was a debacle as proven by current events. Wrong target. Wrong war. Wrong strategy. All begun by Blair and Gang.

              • saffrin

                The first time yes, what with Kuwait being a British protectorate going back to Empire days.
                Second time around not so, the British public knowing it being based of Labour Government lies and associated bulls*it.

              • MaggieL

                The public were far from gung-ho. They marched against the war. I still have the t-shirt “Not in my name”.

          • Kitty MLB

            Oh come on. Labour were the government and privy to
            information that the opposition would not have. Maybe the
            opposition trusted Blair, especially when he said WMD
            was present in Iraq. Sorry little wasp but your bunch started
            all this.

          • girondas

            “I remember enthusiastic support from the opposition”

            Do you telemachus?
            Only because your party lied about weapons of mass destruction. Even the tory party didn’t think that you would sink that low – but you did didn’t you?

            • Kitty MLB

              Very much agreed. Blair is a egomaniac who mislead parliament and with blood on his hands.

            • telemachus

              Politicians must rely on their intelligence chiefs

              • girondas

                “Politicians must rely on their intelligence chiefs”

                Unfortunately you relied on dodgy dossiers instead.

              • Mike

                One can understand why religious fanatics wage war but Blair did it for money and has far more blood on his hands.

                • telemachus

                  Money?
                  Can you substantiate that

                • girondas

                  We could probably find a dodgy dossier.to that effect.
                  You can prove anything with a dodgy dossier can’t you?

              • Fraser Bailey

                Labour bullied the intelligence chiefs, overruled them, and altered the evidence. Shamefully, the intelligence chiefs kept quiet for the sake of their gongs and pensions.

                What a truly evil lot they all are.

              • saffrin

                Politicians yes, Labour on the other hand kill-off their intelligence agents (Dr Kelly) preferring instead to rely on the word of Iraqi cab drivers.

                • MaggieL

                  Dr Kelly wasn’t an intelligence agent. He was our foremost authority on WMD.

          • Kitty MLB

            When is the report into the Iraq war going to actually appear.
            The one that Bush and Blair wish to keep secret .

            • telemachus

              Ask Cameron
              It is in his gift

              • ButcombeMan

                Just in time for the General Election I hope, to remind us all what a corrupt lot Labour were and are.

                • Kitty MLB

                  Yes indeed. Maybe some have forgotten the treachery of Labour.

              • MaggieL

                No it isn’t in his gift. He has no authority over when a report into the machinations of a previous govt. is published.

            • saffrin

              Cameron is bricking it in the knowledge it could provoke war crimes charges over his involvement in the mass murder of the two Libyan Naval vessel crews he ordered bombed while innocently and non threateningly moored in their home base.

          • girondas

            “I remember enthusiastic support from the opposition”

            According to the BBC Telemachus:
            “The total number of UK troops killed in operations in Iraq has reached 179 after a soldier died from a gunshot wound in Basra on 12 February 2009.”

            The Labour Party threw away their lives telemachus, and I will never vote for that party until it is cleansed of the likes of Blair, Brown, Mandelson and of course telemachus .

          • ButcombeMan

            What you remember, is IDS being fooled,lied to and deceived, not only by Blair and his corrupt apparatus, including Scarlet, but also by the US Neocons.

            NEVER EVER trust an army Officer who does not make it above Major.

          • saffrin

            Support that was based on the Labour Government’s lies.

      • Hexhamgeezer

        Yes, life is cheap for you socialist cr£tins. Whether it is youngsters in Iraq/Afghanistan, old folk under Burnham’s ‘care’, or just dissenters in your Gulag paradise it matters not.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Outside a Flashman novel, who uses the expression “Johnny foreigners” (watch the spelling), other than a racist xenophobic bigots, obvious?

    • Mike

      Look guys, I was against Blair & Bush specifically because of the lies but looking back at that doesn’t solve todays problems.

      The only solution to protect the west is to ‘cordon off’ these countries and let them kill themselves until they decide enough is enough. Let them know we’ll leave them alone if they leave us alone but if they attack us, extreme force up to and including the nuclear option could be used. You can’t negotiate with these extremists and the only fix is to ‘remove’ them when the opportunity arises.

    • Kitty MLB

      They will eventually destroy each other if you just
      leave them to it. But as we respect humanity there will
      always be some who have issues with that.

  • an ex-tory voter

    Maybe we should ask George and Tony for helpful some suggestions!!

    • helicoil

      Let them go over there for negotiations, Bliar is supposedly the “Middle East Peace Envoy” after all.

      • HookesLaw

        You are right to point out the irony in that but he is (supposedly) mainly concerned with Israel and Palestinine isn’t he?

        • the viceroy’s gin

          …why don’t you ask your hero the H2B, lad?

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here