Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...omatic-figures


    "The licensing of strategic arms exports is particular case in point: in any number of cases, including Libya and Egypt, British foreign policy is delivering development and governance assistance on the one hand whilst supplying arms on the other"

    Do you guys think this is true or not?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The Guardian never lies. Only the Daily Mail lies. Right?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Wave of Wisdom)
    The Guardian never lies. Only the Daily Mail lies. Right?
    I think there are a few Mail columnists that would agree with Wintour on this one.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    British foreign policy;
    Intervene in Afghanistan and make a mess of the place.
    Intervene in Iraq and make a mess of the place.
    Intervene in Libya and make a mess of the place.
    Want to intervene in Syria so we can displace millions, bomb millions more, and make the region even more unstable. Once we have made a mess of the place we will look for the next place we can make a mess of.

    Also for bonus points we slate Russia for being close to Assad yet are happy to be bessie mates with Saudi Arabia and sell the whole country off to China as well as generally selling arms to countries with appalling human rights records.

    The UK foreign policy is to pick and choose leaders in the region, slamming those who don't do as they are told and sucking up to those who buy our weapons and give us oil.

    Foreign policy has been one long crisis for the UK. For the arms manufacturers it has been great though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The left: The daily mail is always wrong unless it criticises the Tories, Cameron, UKIP, Israel ect.
    The left: The Guardian is always right no matter what
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Gears265)
    The left: The daily mail is always wrong unless it criticises the Tories, Cameron, UKIP, Israel ect.
    The left: The Guardian is always right no matter what
    This isn't fair, I thought the guardian was wrong when it backed Cooper instead of Corbyn
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    British foreign policy;
    Intervene in Afghanistan and make a mess of the place.
    Intervene in Iraq and make a mess of the place.
    Intervene in Libya and make a mess of the place.
    Want to intervene in Syria so we can displace millions, bomb millions more, and make the region even more unstable. Once we have made a mess of the place we will look for the next place we can make a mess of.

    Also for bonus points we slate Russia for being close to Assad yet are happy to be bessie mates with Saudi Arabia and sell the whole country off to China as well as generally selling arms to countries with appalling human rights records.

    The UK foreign policy is to pick and choose leaders in the region, slamming those who don't do as they are told and sucking up to those who buy our weapons and give us oil.

    Foreign policy has been one long crisis for the UK. For the arms manufacturers it has been great though.
    I'm not sure any of our holidays abroad constitute a crisis. They've cost fairly little in life and treasure in the grand schemes of things and UK territory itself is no less safe unless you believe that Islamists would not have come for us anyway.

    Personally I fully support our fights in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Afghanistan is actually the one I'm not sold on purely because it had no strong leadership via a dictator, the Taliban were more or less trying to govern an already failed state.

    That said the big flaw in our plans is that we imposed democracy but have not attempted to impose western values on them. We're far too soft on them and lack the resolve to create a better world.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I'm not sure any of our holidays abroad constitute a crisis. They've cost fairly little in life and treasure in the grand schemes of things and UK territory itself is no less safe unless you believe that Islamists would not have come for us anyway.

    Personally I fully support our fights in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Afghanistan is actually the one I'm not sold on purely because it had no strong leadership via a dictator, the Taliban were more or less trying to govern an already failed state.

    That said the big flaw in our plans is that we imposed democracy but have not attempted to impose western values on them. We're far too soft on them and lack the resolve to create a better world.
    I think they show how disconnected politicians are from the public. They have also cost a lot of money and let us not forget the most important thing; they have caused huge hardship in the region.

    I don't support the fight in Iraq, Libya and Syria because the West just likes to bomb and then walk away. They topple a leader who kept the country relatively stable and then utterly fail to replace it with anything. Democracy, dictatorship, you choose, but they leave it with nothing. The Libyan government couldn't flee any further from its capital or they will be in the sea, etc etc.

    You can't impose Western values on these people. They need dictators, ones who understand the country. They keep the radical elements in check and are actually our best bet in fighting extremism.
    I'm not saying back Assad, Saudi etc but just leave them be-the UK is not the world policeman. You save money, are less of a target for extremists (who will focus their attacks on their domestic regimes now) and just don't make a pigs ear of the world. I know Camereon is as fond as a pigs ear as anyone but we have to move on.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wave of Wisdom)
    The Guardian never lies. Only the Daily Mail lies. Right?
    I suggest you actually read the link next time. It's not The Guardian saying it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    British foreign policy;
    Intervene in Afghanistan and make a mess of the place.
    Intervene in Iraq and make a mess of the place.
    Intervene in Libya and make a mess of the place.
    Want to intervene in Syria so we can displace millions, bomb millions more, and make the region even more unstable. Once we have made a mess of the place we will look for the next place we can make a mess of.

    Also for bonus points we slate Russia for being close to Assad yet are happy to be bessie mates with Saudi Arabia and sell the whole country off to China as well as generally selling arms to countries with appalling human rights records.

    The UK foreign policy is to pick and choose leaders in the region, slamming those who don't do as they are told and sucking up to those who buy our weapons and give us oil.

    Foreign policy has been one long crisis for the UK. For the arms manufacturers it has been great though.
    Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq were already messes before we got involved. Afghanistan and Libya were in the midst of brutal civil wars and Iraq was ruled by a genocidal tyrant. Hardly peaceful Utopias.
    I don't know if you've been following the news, but Syria is also quite a giant unstable mess also, and was long before Western intervention. The Coalition bombing campaign against ISIS has literally saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Kurds, Assyrians, Yazidis, Christians and others. I think they're quite grateful that we made a mess of all those ISIS convoys that were on their way to massacre them all.

    As for foreign policy, yes obvious it's inconsistent and generally in our own interest. That's literally what every country does. On the same note most of the people slating British ties with dubious countries are rampant lefties with dubious ties of their own to Iran and Irish and Palestinian terror groups.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq were already messes before we got involved. Afghanistan and Libya were in the midst of brutal civil wars and Iraq was ruled by a genocidal tyrant. Hardly peaceful Utopias.
    I don't know if you've been following the news, but Syria is also quite a giant unstable mess also, and was long before Western intervention. The Coalition bombing campaign against ISIS has literally saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Kurds, Assyrians, Yazidis, Christians and others. I think they're quite grateful that we made a mess of all those ISIS convoys that were on their way to massacre them all.

    As for foreign policy, yes obvious it's inconsistent and generally in our own interest. That's literally what every country does. On the same note most of the people slating British ties with dubious countries are rampant lefties with dubious ties of their own to Iran and Irish and Palestinian terror groups.
    Guy insults me by saying I don't follow the news;
    then fails to grasp that for the last few decades Western involvement has achieved nothing of any real significance.

    Again, for all this hot air you spout and your condescending tone you don't need to be a rocket scientist to see that the "tyrants" and saving Christians is not the motive of the West. If it was it wouldn't sell arms to people who it also criticises for human rights violations and it wouldn't cosy up to China, Saudi Arabia, Egpyt, etc.

    Condescending and naive, a strange mix.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    Guy insults me by saying I don't follow the news;
    then fails to grasp that for the last few decades Western involvement has achieved nothing of any real significance.

    Again, for all this hot air you spout and your condescending tone you don't need to be a rocket scientist to see that the "tyrants" and saving Christians is not the motive of the West. If it was it wouldn't sell arms to people who it also criticises for human rights violations and it wouldn't cosy up to China, Saudi Arabia, Egpyt, etc.

    Condescending and naive, a strange mix.
    Western involvement has achieved nothing? Afghanistan- Northern Alliance wins civil war, Taliban pushed back, democratic government installed.
    Libya- popular uprising successful. (Can't emphasise enough that the people of Libya rose up against Gaddaffi, we didn't just take him out for the fun of it). The current democratically elected Libyan government controls the vast majority of the country and even has one of those secular, anti-Islamist autocratic strongmen warlords you're so fond of in General Haftar
    Iraq- Murderous tyrant toppled. Yes mistakes were made in the aftermath but Kurds have stopped being massacred and have flourished.
    Syria/Iraq - Western air strikes kill over 10,000 Isis soldiers and destroy over 1,000 of their vehicles. They're severely on the back foot in Iraq.

    So yeah, no significant progress at all, eh?

    Arms exports to other countries have literally no bearing on the matter. The UK government has inconsistent foreign policy, I've already said as much. The only one blowing hot air is you with your tired 'blame the west for everything', 'if we sell arms to Saudi Arabia we shouldn't intervene elsewhere to save massacres' and 'the Arabs are too primitive for democracy and should be subjugated by a strongman' nonsensical rhetoric.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Western involvement has achieved nothing? Afghanistan- Northern Alliance wins civil war, Taliban pushed back, democratic government installed.
    Afghanistan is still in a pretty dire state.
    Libya- popular uprising successful. (Can't emphasise enough that the people of Libya rose up against Gaddaffi, we didn't just take him out for the fun of it). The current democratically elected Libyan government controls the vast majority of the country and even has one of those secular, anti-Islamist autocratic strongmen warlords you're so fond of in General Haftar
    The Libyan government is in control? Lol. This was a low point for the government;
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...reek-car-ferry
    The situation in Afghanistan and Libya isn't as rosy as you make out.
    Iraq- Murderous tyrant toppled. Yes mistakes were made in the aftermath but Kurds have stopped being massacred and have flourished.
    And who has replaced him? Oh right, the violence continues and the country is still in a right mess.
    Syria/Iraq - Western air strikes kill over 10,000 Isis soldiers and destroy over 1,000 of their vehicles. They're severely on the back foot in Iraq.

    So yeah, no significant progress at all, eh?
    Laughable you look at the at least four way civil war in Syria and claim it is a success. ISIS has just taken down an airliner in the worst attack since 9/11. But oh, don't worry, the West are here to remove ISIS. They have spent the last several decades trying to fight extremism in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is pretty unsuccessful.

    Arms exports to other countries have literally no bearing on the matter. The UK government has inconsistent foreign policy, I've already said as much. The only one blowing hot air is you with your tired 'blame the west for everything', 'if we sell arms to Saudi Arabia we shouldn't intervene elsewhere to save massacres' and 'the Arabs are too primitive for democracy and should be subjugated by a strongman' nonsensical rhetoric.
    Yet more hot air from a person who seems to bang on about how a tyrant has been removed, all hail the West, champions of democracy and peace...
    before the West cosy up to the Saudis, sell the whole of the UK to China, welcomethe Egyptian and Israeli leaders with open arms. And selling arms to even worse people.

    The hilarious situation around the Chilcot inquiry tells people everything they need to know about the reasons the West intervene in the region.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    Yet more hot air from a person who seems to bang on about how a tyrant has been removed, all hail the West, champions of democracy and peace...
    before the West cosy up to the Saudis, sell the whole of the UK to China, welcomethe Egyptian and Israeli leaders with open arms. And selling arms to even worse people.

    The hilarious situation around the Chilcot inquiry tells people everything they need to know about the reasons the West intervene in the region.
    That's a dubious argument. If anything you should be arguing that the UK should stop associating with countries like Saudi Arabia and China. Instead you're implying Britain should stop intervening in conflict zones. It takes some messed up logical to suggest that the UK should not intervene to save hundreds of thousands of innocent people from quite literally the most barbaric terror organisation in recent times, because of arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

    Pray tell exactly what the Chilcot inquiry has revealed? It hasn't revealed some big arms/oil industry conspiracy as a lot of people would hope. It reveals that Tony Blair has a messiah complex. I could have told you that a long time ago.

    As for...
    Afghanistan-
    Hardly mission accomplished, but has significant progress been made? The country is immensely better off now than when it was under the thumb of the Taliban and Pakistani ISI.

    Libya-
    Let's take a look at the current strategic map
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liby...4–present%29
    Yes, the CoD had to set up camp in a pretty unorthodox place a year ago when they fled Tripoli, where all the government institutions are based. Like most of your arguments though, doesn't actually contradict anything I said. Neither country is 'rosy'- the conflicts are still ongoing. They are both better than before the West intervened. Significant progress HAS been made.

    Syria- There is a huge difference between progress and success. The coalition campaign has made huge progress against ISIS. They were steamrolling through Iraq, at the gates of Baghdad, advancing on Irbil, and on the verge of capturing Kobane. Simply because we haven't decisively thrashed ISIS into oblivion doesn't mean significant progress hasn't been made. The same with the Taliban.
    As for the downing of the Russian airliner- what of it? It's a terrible tragedy, but what do you think we should do? Capitulate, let ISIS take over Syria and Iraq? Show the world we back down if pushed? Refuse to do anything out of fear a nutcase might attack us?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    That's a dubious argument. If anything you should be arguing that the UK should stop associating with countries like Saudi Arabia and China. Instead you're implying Britain should stop intervening in conflict zones. It takes some messed up logical to suggest that the UK should not intervene to save hundreds of thousands of innocent people from quite literally the most barbaric terror organisation in recent times, because of arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

    Pray tell exactly what the Chilcot inquiry has revealed? It hasn't revealed some big arms/oil industry conspiracy as a lot of people would hope. It reveals that Tony Blair has a messiah complex. I could have told you that a long time ago.

    As for...
    Afghanistan-
    Hardly mission accomplished, but has significant progress been made? The country is immensely better off now than when it was under the thumb of the Taliban and Pakistani ISI.

    Libya-
    Let's take a look at the current strategic map
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liby...4–present%29
    Yes, the CoD had to set up camp in a pretty unorthodox place a year ago when they fled Tripoli, where all the government institutions are based. Like most of your arguments though, doesn't actually contradict anything I said. Neither country is 'rosy'- the conflicts are still ongoing. They are both better than before the West intervened. Significant progress HAS been made.

    Syria- There is a huge difference between progress and success. The coalition campaign has made huge progress against ISIS. They were steamrolling through Iraq, at the gates of Baghdad, advancing on Irbil, and on the verge of capturing Kobane. Simply because we haven't decisively thrashed ISIS into oblivion doesn't mean significant progress hasn't been made. The same with the Taliban.
    As for the downing of the Russian airliner- what of it? It's a terrible tragedy, but what do you think we should do? Capitulate, let ISIS take over Syria and Iraq? Show the world we back down if pushed? Refuse to do anything out of fear a nutcase might attack us?
    I'm confused; the Chilcot enquiry hasn't been released fully yet, and when it does it will be thousands of pages. Yet here you are telling us what it says?

    Fascinating. Grade A bull right here. If we ever needed more proof. it's delay tells us a lot, but as for its content...well you clearly read the news so much more than me that you know the news of the future. Care to tell me what the lottery numbers will be next week? If you can remember that is.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    I'm confused; the Chilcot enquiry hasn't been released fully yet, and when it does it will be thousands of pages. Yet here you are telling us what it says?

    Fascinating. Grade A bull right here. If we ever needed more proof. it's delay tells us a lot, but as for its content...well you clearly read the news so much more than me that you know the news of the future. Care to tell me what the lottery numbers will be next week? If you can remember that is.
    The Chilcot inquiry finished in 2011. Most of it was public. There's plenty of speculation and analysis around the report (the report and the inquiry are not the same thing), enough to start forming opinion. But nice strawman rant anyway. While we're here, please do also explain exactly how the delays of publication of the report tells us whatever it is you think it tells us.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I'm not sure any of our holidays abroad constitute a crisis. They've cost fairly little in life and treasure in the grand schemes of things and UK territory itself is no less safe unless you believe that Islamists would not have come for us anyway.

    Personally I fully support our fights in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Afghanistan is actually the one I'm not sold on purely because it had no strong leadership via a dictator, the Taliban were more or less trying to govern an already failed state.

    That said the big flaw in our plans is that we imposed democracy but have not attempted to impose western values on them. We're far too soft on them and lack the resolve to create a better world.
    Great response but you are forgetting the hash we made of India / Pakistan and most of Africa.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    There's plenty of speculation and analysis around the Chilcot inquiry, enough to start forming opinion. But nice strawman rant anyway. While we're here, please do also explain exactly how the delays of publication of the report tells us whatever it is you think it tells us.
    Here is what you said;

    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Pray tell exactly what the Chilcot inquiry has revealed? It hasn't revealed some big arms/oil industry conspiracy as a lot of people would hope. It reveals that Tony Blair has a messiah complex. I could have told you that a long time ago.
    Doesn't sound like a guy saying "rumours say", or anything of the sort. It sounds like a guy being arrogant and saying, black and white, what it does and does not say.

    You can go on about how knowledgeable you are as much as you want, that you even tell us what reports that haven't been released yet (and are thousands of pages long anyway) say tell us everything we need to know;

    You are full of yourself, and you are just full of manure.

    "It says Tony Blair has a messiah complex, I could have told you that". Oh well thank you Mr. Know it all for the findings of the report being so obvious to you before it even exists yet. Perhaps I could borrow your time machine at some point?

    Hilarious, you so arrogantly state the findings of the report like it is so obvious. "I could have told you that". It seems you base your views on complete nonsense. Then again, I shouldn't argue with an omniscient being like you who can see into the future and when they do they state the future events in such a matter of fact, "I could have told you that" kind of way". You probably know next weeks lotto numbers. Is that another future event that "you could have told me a long time ago"?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Great response but you are forgetting the hash we made of India / Pakistan and most of Africa.
    Ask our resident time machine owner if he can remember how these events will turn out for these countries by 2030. After all, he is very familiar with the currently not released Chilcot enquiry.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i<3milkshake)
    Ask our resident time machine owner if he can remember how these events will turn out for these countries by 2030. After all, he is very familiar with the currently not released Chilcot enquiry.
    Have a listen to this
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06kgvcl

    It makes for interesting listening. The reporter interviews many people including Hans Blix who gave evidence. Feel free to make up your mind as you please, but it feels like the writing is on the wall to me. I am sure I heard something over the weekend suggesting that the Attorney General was asked to reconsider his advice to TB when he gave his considered opinion that a war would be illegal.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.