FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > What’s the alternative?
What’s the alternative?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP 9 weeks ago
|
I’ve taken part in the debating of the Iran situation for a couple of days and have come to realise that like all the other debates in here, they are sometimes interesting, sometimes educational, sometimes fun, sometimes predictable, sometimes surprising, sometimes frustrating, sometimes argumentative, sometimes agreeable… but never fruitful.
The idea that a war can be lawful in the eyes of the UN goes against the whole concept of the UN. For a war to be “lawful” certain things have to have happened. While the UN waits for all those triggers to happen and then have a few debates and eventually a vote, tens of thousands of people were being systematically murdered by their own government. Not because they were terrorists, but because they wanted the freedoms that the UN claims to cherish.
The genocide of the people of Iran was an illegal act that the UN seemed totally oblivious to and not interested in doing anything about.
It seems lives are valued based on which fairytale they believe in. Is the war in Nigeria against Christians legal? How about the war between different Muslim factions in the Middle East? The 7th October attack, was that legal? A lot of people called Israel’s response illegal, based on what fairytale the victims read no doubt. The civil wars across the globe, are they legal? So why the obsession with this country be? Again, does it come down to religion?
Should the free world not have sent troops to France in 1944? The US had not been attacked by Germany, should they have stayed out of it? Should South Korea have been left to the mercy of the north? Should the US have stayed out of Panama and Vietnam. Should more have been done when Assad was in change of Syria? Should Saddam Husain been left alone when he invaded Kuwait? The list is endless.
“War is a continuation of politics by other means” - Carl von Clausewitz
I think I might be saying this a lot but what is your suggested alternative? Not just in this situation but start with this, but what should the UN do when a government commits genocide? Does it really matter what religions are involved and if so, why?
Nobody wants military action, but no sane person wants an entire nation of people slaughtered by their own government either. Sanctions haven’t worked, the people of Iran either lived in fear or supported the regime.
So what is the alternative? Should the UN have an army? And if so, who controls where it is sent and who pays for it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"
Nobody wants military action, but no sane person wants an entire nation of people slaughtered by their own government either. Sanctions haven’t worked, the people of Iran either lived in fear or supported the regime.
"
If you think Israel and the USA have started this war out of some altruistic goal of freeing the people of Iran, I have a bridge you may be interested in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Its not perfect and has some stains since it was seen as the solution after world war 2 but a world where the most powerful do what they like, take what they want when they can serves no one..
Regional collectivism is one idea..
As for a solution I doubt I or anyone has one that is fully perfect..
what's yours Op? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP 9 weeks ago
|
"Well the world stood back and did nothing whilst Stalin murdered over 20 million of his own people, why would Iran be any different other than gaining control of oil ?"
I agree wholeheartedly, why should it. But I’m not sure if you are arguing for a military deployment against Stalin or against military deployment in Iran? Or both? Or neither?
I don’t think oil is the big chip it used to be. The US have plenty of their own and lots of “friendly” countries to buy it from. And the western world is moving away from fossil fuels, although that’s a whole other debate. Iran has had sanctions for a very long time. There’s no shortage of countries who will ignore sanctions and buy Iranian oil. Sanctions clearly don’t work. They have not stoped Iran and not stopped Russia in Ukraine.
There’s some similarities between military intervention and smacking a child. Morally it’s wrong, but if it breaks a pattern of behaviour that would cause more harm, then there’s arguments for it.
You only stop a bully by standing up to them. If you don’t want your lunch money taken from you every morning you have to stand up for yourself. To continue that metaphor, you tell the teacher and the bully denies it and so the school does nothing, then what? And there’s 3 of them? How can you stand up to 3 bigger kids? Ask your big brother? Your big brother knows he’s gonna get in trouble but he either now becomes complicit by his inaction, or he threatens the bullies? They ignore the threats?
Sooner or later the talking has to stop and someone has to do something. But what? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP 9 weeks ago
|
"Its not perfect and has some stains since it was seen as the solution after world war 2 but a world where the most powerful do what they like, take what they want when they can serves no one..
Regional collectivism is one idea..
As for a solution I doubt I or anyone has one that is fully perfect..
what's yours Op?"
My solution is what I hope will happen here. And I would say this regardless of the religions involved.
You attempt to take out the government with as minimal collateral damage as possible. Sometimes the snake will grow back the same head with a different face. Sometimes the snake will die and a new order emerges. I don’t think outsiders should get involved in affecting who that new order might be.
The problem with the likes of Russia is they have enough nukes to wipe out humanity 100 times over. The bully in this case is more powerful than the rest of the school put together. MAD has kept the peace for a long time, but Putin realised that he could wage a conventional war and nobody would get involved.
Iran wanted nukes for the same reason as well as to kill all the Jews. If they had nukes, would the US have crossed the line? Not a chance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Well the UN did next to fuck all for Gaza so not holding my breath on Iran
It took them three and a half years to send peacekeepers to Bosnia after 120,000 killed and they royally fucked up on Rwanda genocide.
They felled 247 acres of rainforest to build the road to their COP30 last year.
Cretinous organisation.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
UN? It would be quicker to get planning permission for an extension or conservatory.
War is unpredictable, if the reps of the UN were assisanted would they need to take a vote on it to sort it out.
The UN needs to be more flexible.
Iran needed sorting out for a long time but what did the UN do absolutely fa. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its not perfect and has some stains since it was seen as the solution after world war 2 but a world where the most powerful do what they like, take what they want when they can serves no one..
Regional collectivism is one idea..
As for a solution I doubt I or anyone has one that is fully perfect..
what's yours Op?
My solution is what I hope will happen here. And I would say this regardless of the religions involved.
You attempt to take out the government with as minimal collateral damage as possible. Sometimes the snake will grow back the same head with a different face. Sometimes the snake will die and a new order emerges. I don’t think outsiders should get involved in affecting who that new order might be.
The problem with the likes of Russia is they have enough nukes to wipe out humanity 100 times over. The bully in this case is more powerful than the rest of the school put together. MAD has kept the peace for a long time, but Putin realised that he could wage a conventional war and nobody would get involved.
Iran wanted nukes for the same reason as well as to kill all the Jews. If they had nukes, would the US have crossed the line? Not a chance. "
The wanting to be in the biggest bomb club makes complete sense for the deterrent of it yes..
North Korea know that too and probably would state the same kill them all about the South where it not forvthe Chinese saying no..
The Iranian regime can be allowed to get to the point where they have one i know that but I tend to favour monitors with full access from the global community..
Which isn't perfect I know .. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP 9 weeks ago
|
"Well the UN did next to fuck all for Gaza so not holding my breath on Iran
It took them three and a half years to send peacekeepers to Bosnia after 120,000 killed and they royally fucked up on Rwanda genocide.
They felled 247 acres of rainforest to build the road to their COP30 last year.
Cretinous organisation.
"
They are always “too much, too little, too late” or do nothing at all. A toothless guard dog is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its not perfect and has some stains since it was seen as the solution after world war 2 but a world where the most powerful do what they like, take what they want when they can serves no one..
Regional collectivism is one idea..
As for a solution I doubt I or anyone has one that is fully perfect..
what's yours Op?
My solution is what I hope will happen here. And I would say this regardless of the religions involved.
You attempt to take out the government with as minimal collateral damage as possible. Sometimes the snake will grow back the same head with a different face. Sometimes the snake will die and a new order emerges. I don’t think outsiders should get involved in affecting who that new order might be.
The problem with the likes of Russia is they have enough nukes to wipe out humanity 100 times over. The bully in this case is more powerful than the rest of the school put together. MAD has kept the peace for a long time, but Putin realised that he could wage a conventional war and nobody would get involved.
Iran wanted nukes for the same reason as well as to kill all the Jews. If they had nukes, would the US have crossed the line? Not a chance.
The wanting to be in the biggest bomb club makes complete sense for the deterrent of it yes..
North Korea know that too and probably would state the same kill them all about the South where it not forvthe Chinese saying no..
The Iranian regime can be allowed to get to the point where they have one i know that but I tend to favour monitors with full access from the global community..
Which isn't perfect I know .."
Can'tbe allowed.. ffs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
They are always “too much, too little, too late” or do nothing at all. A toothless guard dog is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. "
A toothless dog can still bark and therein lies the dilemma for a would be burglar..
In some ways the UN has probably acted similarly.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"
My solution is what I hope will happen here. And I would say this regardless of the religions involved.
You attempt to take out the government with as minimal collateral damage as possible. Sometimes the snake will grow back the same head with a different face. Sometimes the snake will die and a new order emerges. I don’t think outsiders should get involved in affecting who that new order might be.
"
You want to create a power vacuum and walk away.
What could possibly go wrong? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP 9 weeks ago
|
"
They are always “too much, too little, too late” or do nothing at all. A toothless guard dog is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
A toothless dog can still bark and therein lies the dilemma for a would be burglar..
In some ways the UN has probably acted similarly.."
Yes, but the burglar is only worried about a barking dog because it might trigger police attention. That’s where the metaphor falls down, there is no international police force. Just a USA that sometimes acts like one, and usually gets condemned when it does. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I feel like I have too little understanding of how the UN got to be how it is today. It seems right that we have 1 body that has effective powerd to be able to curtail inappropriate behaviour between states. I assume that some who at some level don't 100% agree to this have helped to develop the system to become ineffective in practice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Only by understanding how what happens and moving away from this idea it's about culture or religion.
Wars happen when groups compete for power, land, security, or resources, so the only alternative seems to be some kind of world government to manage all that stuff  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP 9 weeks ago
|
"I feel like I have too little understanding of how the UN got to be how it is today. It seems right that we have 1 body that has effective powerd to be able to curtail inappropriate behaviour between states. I assume that some who at some level don't 100% agree to this have helped to develop the system to become ineffective in practice. "
The problem is the UN doesn’t really have much power. They can evoke sanctions but has no power to enforce them, other than sanctions against those who break sanctions. And they have no power to enforce those sanctions….. I’m sure you get the idea.
There is nothing to stop rogue governments oppressing and slaughtering its citizens. And nothing to stop global powers invading other countries in “special military operations”
Don’t take this the wrong way but as a forum mod, you actually have more power than the UN, but it’s limited to in here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Well the world stood back and did nothing whilst Stalin murdered over 20 million of his own people, why would Iran be any different other than gaining control of oil ?"
If we just wiped our all leaders with beards and moustaches the world would be a better place. Hitler, Stalin, Khomeni, Corbyn, the list is endless.🤔  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Only by understanding how what happens and moving away from this idea it's about culture or religion.
Wars happen when groups compete for power, land, security, or resources, so the only alternative seems to be some kind of world government to manage all that stuff "
We had that with Team America 🇺🇸 💪 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it."
So you supported the invasion of Iraq? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it.
So you supported the invasion of Iraq? "
No. I thought that would be a fuck up from day one and it was. The same reason I think this mad Iran adventure is going to end up in shitsville.
It is possible to be against mad military escapades because they just don’t make practical sense on the ground. You don’t need to resort to some fantasy of “international law” to be against stupidity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
The current actions are the least worst option and I support them.
A huge part of the opposition is motivated by anti semitism, anti Americanism or an obsessive-compulsive hatred of President Trump. These views can be safely discounted, as can the 'illegal' argument as a UN law which can't be enforced isn't a law at all, its just virtue signalling with an expense account.
That leaves the pragmatic argument that the current action will not work and may leave Iran worse off than ever. Clearly this is possible, perhaps even likely, but the opposite outcome is equally possible, and worth the risk in my opinion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My solution is very pie in the sky and completely unrealistic at this moment in time. Could it ever happen ? Who knows ?
.
Requirement #1 : Completely neutral 3rd party
Requirement #2 : Benevolent up to a point
Requirement #3 : Not from this Earth
.
They land. Introduce themselves. Explain that they are not hostile, but only up to a point.
We ask what that point is ?
They reply "When you threaten each other, we will step in. When you kill each other, we will go hostile."
We ask "Hostile in what way?"
They reply, "Removal of your regime, so you can install a more peaceful one. Then we cease being hostile again." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 9 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it.
So you supported the invasion of Iraq? "
No.
Did you support Nelson Mandela?
Laws protect a system. Sometimes that system is right, and sometimes it is wrong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it."
Yeah it's funny how many people throw around the term "international law" when there is no clear enforcement mechanism. At best, they are "guidance". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it.
Yeah it's funny how many people throw around the term "international law" when there is no clear enforcement mechanism. At best, they are "guidance". "
Sadly Britain seems to have the only leader left who regards international 'law' not as guidance, but holy writ. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it.
Yeah it's funny how many people throw around the term "international law" when there is no clear enforcement mechanism. At best, they are "guidance".
Sadly Britain seems to have the only leader left who regards international 'law' not as guidance, but holy writ."
Why sadly?
I’ll ask again as nobody has answered it yet:
Should the UK follow the USA’s requests/demands on every occasion, regardless of circumstance? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"I don’t understand why people seem obsessed with this idea of “international law”. It doesn’t exist. It is a chimera that people are extrapolating from their daily lives
The “law” we see and live by on a daily basis only exists because we live inside a nation state that sets boundaries about what is and is not acceptable and has the ability through the judicial system to impose its will.
That doesn’t exist outside of the nation state and never will. When it comes to “international law” you are in a Hobbsian world of brutality and power. Those with the biggest sticks get to decide what is and isn’t acceptable.
This is how it always has been and always will be. I appreciate this will upset the sensitivities of many. So be it.
So you supported the invasion of Iraq?
No.
Did you support Nelson Mandela?
Laws protect a system. Sometimes that system is right, and sometimes it is wrong."
Should there not be a system aimed at preventing nations from commencing war without justification? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
So you supported the invasion of Iraq?
No.
Did you support Nelson Mandela?
Laws protect a system. Sometimes that system is right, and sometimes it is wrong.
Should there not be a system aimed at preventing nations from commencing war without justification? "
Of course there should. Shouldn't there be laws against terrorism? There are laws against blasphemy, would you argue in favour of those?
Once you decide that morality supercedes a law, it puts all laws into a different perspective. At what point (or never) should a law be broken?
And this is all assuming that laws have, indeed, been broken (which is a reasonable assumption).
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I’ll ask again as nobody has answered it yet:
Should the UK follow the USA’s requests/demands on every occasion, regardless of circumstance?"
No. Period. The UK, as a sovereign nation, should not bow to the US, the EU or any other body should it choose not to.
SKS's decision is entirely within his gift, and he has not acted wrongly. Although some people might argue he could have acted more rightly. There is room for tolerance around the edges of the rules that would allow him to allow the US use of bases, which would be in the spirit of an alliance, with potential dividends down the line, or making a positive difference in the current war. Others would disagree, and that's fine - we're a democracy and we need to tolerate views and actions different to our own, and we get to vote in a few years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"
So you supported the invasion of Iraq?
No.
Did you support Nelson Mandela?
Laws protect a system. Sometimes that system is right, and sometimes it is wrong.
Should there not be a system aimed at preventing nations from commencing war without justification?
Of course there should. Shouldn't there be laws against terrorism? There are laws against blasphemy, would you argue in favour of those?
Once you decide that morality supercedes a law, it puts all laws into a different perspective. At what point (or never) should a law be broken?
And this is all assuming that laws have, indeed, been broken (which is a reasonable assumption).
"
It’s an interesting moral dilemma, and one which an organisation like the UN is supposed to manage.
At present, it seems unlikely that they will look kindly on Isreal/USA’s actions in Iran |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s an interesting moral dilemma, and one which an organisation like the UN is supposed to manage. "
Who’s morals do you use as the basis for this organisation?
The reality is that morals are place and time dependent. What we think is moral now is radically different to what we thought was moral decades ago. It will be different in decades hence. You don’t have to go far to see that different cultures think morality means different things today.
The UN has failed because of this exact issue. It just becomes a vacuous talking shop where everyone disagrees about how they see the world.
It suffers from the exact problem OP identified with threads in here:
“they are sometimes interesting, sometimes educational, sometimes fun, sometimes predictable, sometimes surprising, sometimes frustrating, sometimes argumentative, sometimes agreeable… but never fruitful.” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"
I’ll ask again as nobody has answered it yet:
Should the UK follow the USA’s requests/demands on every occasion, regardless of circumstance?
No. Period. The UK, as a sovereign nation, should not bow to the US, the EU or any other body should it choose not to.
SKS's decision is entirely within his gift, and he has not acted wrongly. Although some people might argue he could have acted more rightly. There is room for tolerance around the edges of the rules that would allow him to allow the US use of bases, which would be in the spirit of an alliance, with potential dividends down the line, or making a positive difference in the current war. Others would disagree, and that's fine - we're a democracy and we need to tolerate views and actions different to our own, and we get to vote in a few years."
Seems to be real anger in Cyprus about Starmer's response, and in Gulf States too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I’ll ask again as nobody has answered it yet:
Should the UK follow the USA’s requests/demands on every occasion, regardless of circumstance?
No. Period. The UK, as a sovereign nation, should not bow to the US, the EU or any other body should it choose not to.
SKS's decision is entirely within his gift, and he has not acted wrongly. Although some people might argue he could have acted more rightly. There is room for tolerance around the edges of the rules that would allow him to allow the US use of bases, which would be in the spirit of an alliance, with potential dividends down the line, or making a positive difference in the current war. Others would disagree, and that's fine - we're a democracy and we need to tolerate views and actions different to our own, and we get to vote in a few years.
Seems to be real anger in Cyprus about Starmer's response, and in Gulf States too. "
Who exactly is angry in the GCC? As far as I can tell the only people who are “angry” are a bunch of “influencers” who have spent the last few years slagging off the UK as decrepit and finished and who now want an emergency flight out of their idyllic and vaporous lifestyle. My heart bleeds for them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"It’s an interesting moral dilemma, and one which an organisation like the UN is supposed to manage.
Who’s morals do you use as the basis for this organisation?
The reality is that morals are place and time dependent. What we think is moral now is radically different to what we thought was moral decades ago. It will be different in decades hence. You don’t have to go far to see that different cultures think morality means different things today.
The UN has failed because of this exact issue. It just becomes a vacuous talking shop where everyone disagrees about how they see the world.
It suffers from the exact problem OP identified with threads in here:
“they are sometimes interesting, sometimes educational, sometimes fun, sometimes predictable, sometimes surprising, sometimes frustrating, sometimes argumentative, sometimes agreeable… but never fruitful.”"
The UN and other post WW2 international institutions and treaties were all founded by nation States who understood their strengt or weakness rested on the strength or weakness of the member nation states.
At some point a generation of politicians with no memory of WW2 started to believe these institutions had a life of their own and should supercede the nation state, something never envisaged by their founders. Starmer embodies this mindset and hardly seems to believe in the nation state at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s an interesting moral dilemma, and one which an organisation like the UN is supposed to manage.
Who’s morals do you use as the basis for this organisation?
The reality is that morals are place and time dependent. What we think is moral now is radically different to what we thought was moral decades ago. It will be different in decades hence. You don’t have to go far to see that different cultures think morality means different things today.
The UN has failed because of this exact issue. It just becomes a vacuous talking shop where everyone disagrees about how they see the world.
It suffers from the exact problem OP identified with threads in here:
“they are sometimes interesting, sometimes educational, sometimes fun, sometimes predictable, sometimes surprising, sometimes frustrating, sometimes argumentative, sometimes agreeable… but never fruitful.”
The UN and other post WW2 international institutions and treaties were all founded by nation States who understood their strengt or weakness rested on the strength or weakness of the member nation states.
At some point a generation of politicians with no memory of WW2 started to believe these institutions had a life of their own and should supercede the nation state, something never envisaged by their founders. Starmer embodies this mindset and hardly seems to believe in the nation state at all."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'"
Imagine what thatcher would have sent |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It’s an interesting moral dilemma, and one which an organisation like the UN is supposed to manage.
Who’s morals do you use as the basis for this organisation?
The reality is that morals are place and time dependent. What we think is moral now is radically different to what we thought was moral decades ago. It will be different in decades hence. You don’t have to go far to see that different cultures think morality means different things today.
The UN has failed because of this exact issue. It just becomes a vacuous talking shop where everyone disagrees about how they see the world.
It suffers from the exact problem OP identified with threads in here:
“they are sometimes interesting, sometimes educational, sometimes fun, sometimes predictable, sometimes surprising, sometimes frustrating, sometimes argumentative, sometimes agreeable… but never fruitful.”"
👍
Theoretically, this is how "international laws" are supposed to work - Leaders from different countries get together and agree on what the laws should be.
But it suffers from issues you mentioned - Morals change. Countries elect different leaders in subsequent elections. What Biden would have thought must be "international law" will be very different from what Trump thinks it should be. Before Trump's terms ends, most other countries would have elected new leaders who would have different opinions on this matter altogether.
Then there is the matter of enforcement which is hard to do unless you have a UN army. Then it opens up the questions of sovereignty.
The UN managed to push some things like the refugee convention through in the aftermath of the world wars when the countries were aligned on some moral views. But it has been a long time since then. We already see that the refugee conventions aren't standing the test of time.
As things stand, the UN is just a venue for leaders to discuss diplomacy with help or guidance from the other countries. And even that's possible only if the concerned countries are willing to do so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'"
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
Imagine what thatcher would have sent "
Prince Andrew...
Lock up your daughters! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
"
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
Imagine what thatcher would have sent "
The warnings from our High Commissioner weren't given enough attention prior to Argentina invading the Falklands plus at the time her Government were looking to cut the Navy..
Being fair given the distance any deployment takes time, much like Cyprus plus no one can second guess or predict what an aggressor might do as evidenced by the attacks in the Gulf currently..
Maybe if we ruled the seas again.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
Imagine what thatcher would have sent
Prince Andrew...
Lock up your daughters!"
😯😯🤣🤣 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us."
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight.."
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
Imagine what thatcher would have sent
Prince Andrew...
Lock up your daughters!"
He 'liked them young' as an ex matelot mate said some 20 years ago.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️"
How much more tax would you like to pay?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️
How much more tax would you like to pay?
"
Annual defence bill 62bn. Welfare bill 330bn. 10bn cost of illegal migration.
I'm not Rachel from accounts but I think I see a solution. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️
How much more tax would you like to pay?
Annual defence bill 62bn. Welfare bill 330bn. 10bn cost of illegal migration.
I'm not Rachel from accounts but I think I see a solution."
You know 50% of the welfare bill is pensions, don’t you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️
How much more tax would you like to pay?
Annual defence bill 62bn. Welfare bill 330bn. 10bn cost of illegal migration.
I'm not Rachel from accounts but I think I see a solution.
You know 50% of the welfare bill is not for pensions, don’t you? "
I do
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️
How much more tax would you like to pay?
Annual defence bill 62bn. Welfare bill 330bn. 10bn cost of illegal migration.
I'm not Rachel from accounts but I think I see a solution.
You know 50% of the welfare bill is not for pensions, don’t you?
I do
"
Good stuff. Not sure how people would respond to have their pensions slashed to pay for using our military in illegal wars started by the orange dictator. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️
How much more tax would you like to pay?
Annual defence bill 62bn. Welfare bill 330bn. 10bn cost of illegal migration.
I'm not Rachel from accounts but I think I see a solution."
You need to check your figures Rachel.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
It was the Raf..
Also the drone that hit Akrotiri evaded the Cypriots and our radar as it came in low..
Of course its a concern for anyone in the vicinity of the base ..
Im not even sure there is a civilian warning system ..
Politics and the opportunity of hindsight..
How fortunate we have Captain Hindsight in charge.🤦♂️
How much more tax would you like to pay?
Annual defence bill 62bn. Welfare bill 330bn. 10bn cost of illegal migration.
I'm not Rachel from accounts but I think I see a solution.
You know 50% of the welfare bill is not for pensions, don’t you?
I do
Good stuff. Not sure how people would respond to have their pensions slashed to pay for using our military in illegal wars started by the orange dictator. "
🤭🤭🤭 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us."
Do you think he knows he is a sovereign nation and it is generally incumbent on sovereign nations to be able to defend their own terrority?
If I remember correctly someone else was fairly vocal on that recently. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'"
In your selective reporting you omitted to add that he also thanked Starmer for attending to their worries..
How unusual you were less than objective.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
He sounds confused..
Maybe someone could remind him just who it was who intercepted the two drones after the first one hit Akrotiri..
I would imagine he knows rather more about the situation than either of us.
Do you think he knows he is a sovereign nation and it is generally incumbent on sovereign nations to be able to defend their own terrority?
If I remember correctly someone else was fairly vocal on that recently. "
The RAF bases there are British sovereign territory. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
In your selective reporting you omitted to add that he also thanked Starmer for attending to their worries..
How unusual you were less than objective.. "
Yet here is the famously far right BBC reporting the criticism.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0e55y0pzgwo
I guess the reason you didn't use an actual objective quote like myself is because what he added was: "Let's say the people are disappointed, the people are scared, the people could expect more."
He added he would "thank [Starmer] for paying attention to our worries and I'd love to see more". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 9 weeks ago
|
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
In your selective reporting you omitted to add that he also thanked Starmer for attending to their worries..
How unusual you were less than objective..
Yet here is the famously far right BBC reporting the criticism.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0e55y0pzgwo
I guess the reason you didn't use an actual objective quote like myself is because what he added was: "Let's say the people are disappointed, the people are scared, the people could expect more."
He added he would "thank [Starmer] for paying attention to our worries and I'd love to see more"."
Of course 'paying attention' and 'attending to' is the difference between noticing an issue and acting to address it. How curious that you changed the quote.🤔 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
In your selective reporting you omitted to add that he also thanked Starmer for attending to their worries..
How unusual you were less than objective..
Yet here is the famously far right BBC reporting the criticism.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0e55y0pzgwo
I guess the reason you didn't use an actual objective quote like myself is because what he added was: "Let's say the people are disappointed, the people are scared, the people could expect more."
He added he would "thank [Starmer] for paying attention to our worries and I'd love to see more"."
So he did say thank you.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling
skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present.'
In your selective reporting you omitted to add that he also thanked Starmer for attending to their worries..
How unusual you were less than objective..
Yet here is the famously far right BBC reporting the criticism.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0e55y0pzgwo
I guess the reason you didn't use an actual objective quote like myself is because what he added was: "Let's say the people are disappointed, the people are scared, the people could expect more."
He added he would "thank [Starmer] for paying attention to our worries and I'd love to see more".
Of course 'paying attention' and 'attending to' is the difference between noticing an issue and acting to address it. How curious that you changed the quote.🤔"
That's a fair point, I misquoted and accept my error..
Its a moot point however from him given the Raf had attended to the latter drones, so they were clearly paying attention..
The Cypriot didn't mobilise any assets to deal with the first one as they too like the Raf didnt spot it due to its altitude etc.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
