Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Wreck the Casbah. Again.

Ooer, Missus.  Someone really has got his knickers in a knot.

Britain has stepped through the looking glass into a weird and distorting new world, and one from which I fear she will never step back. By refusing to punish a foreign dictator for his despicable use of poison gas on unarmed civilians, we have deliberately relinquished our once-cherished role as one of the world’s foremost moral policemen, and joined the ranks of global spectators, merely tut-tutting from the sidelines rather than taking an active part in defending decency.

It seems that Andrew Roberts would have us believe that Cameron is a shining beacon of masterful statesmanship rather than the vacillating and incompetent spiv we know he really is.  It was the Assad regime wot dunnit because that is the direction in which the Prime Ministerial finger has been told to point.   Others beg to differ.  Our masters are demanding that we discriminate between two evils, despite the lack of any substantiated evidence, when it is far from clear which evil, if any, is the lesser. The only decent thing we can do in such circumstances is to not bomb the crap out of Damascus and kill even more civilians in the name of defending a questionable sense of “decency”.

A huge cultural shift has taken place in our country and historians of the future will focus on Thursday night, in the House of Commons, as the time that the new Britain emerged in all its hideous, amoral selfishness.

If future historians display the blind stupidity Andrew Roberts appears to possess who gives a Scammel Truck what they think?

The Britain we have lost is the one that took its historic responsibilities as a former Great Power seriously and sought to enforce international agreements, such as those banning the use of chemical weapons.

I think the operative word in that sentence is former, everything else is hyperventilated twaddle.  We are a small group of islands.  We are broke.  We no longer have the military might we once possessed.  We can’t even equip an aircraft carrier without the assistance of the French.  Our responsibility is to supply humanitarian aid and nothing more.  Let the Arabs sort their own mess out.  They’re going to blame us for the outcome whether we send in the missiles or not.

The Britain we must now look forward to is the one exemplified by Danny Boyle’s Olympics opening ceremony, where everything socialistic, feel-goody, hipster and ‘progressive’ was glorified, whereas the things we should really be proud about Britain for – such as her place in the front lines of the struggles against Fascism, Communism, Islamofascism and other totalitarian ideologies – were entirely ignored.

Because everyone who came out against bombing Damascus without the benefit of proof is a tofu-eating, Guardian reading surrender marmoset?  Because what we are all required to be are trained acceptance monkeys who swallow every morsel of posturing bollocks fed to us by our political effete, no questions asked?

Where were the references to Winston Churchill, 1940 or the Battle of Britain? They were replaced by children jumping up and down on NHS beds.

STOP PRESS! World War II ends in 1945.  Shift forwards sixty-eight years and the dumb as rocks legacy media runs stories about trampolining kiddies as Syria descends deeper into sectarian violence.   Meanwhile a so called academic jumps up and down on the spot, making a weapons grade prat of himself over something he clearly doesn’t have much of a clue about other than what Cameron says is true because his pal Barry told him so.  And all this before the UN investigation team have even begun to write their report.

I don’t recognise this culturally, socially and morally very different country. On Thursday night the majority of our Parliament knew that they had nothing to fear from their constituents if they indulged in a gross display of Little Englandism, in stark contrast to centuries of traditionally supporting the victims of monstrous oppression.

I don’t recall reading Roberts’ moral outrage about our non-intervention in Rwanda.  Or is genocide not as monstrously oppressive as CWs in Big Academia’s view?

And nothing qualifies as worse oppression than having at least 1,429 innocents slaughtered – 400 of those children – with a weapon so obscene that the world came together in Geneva in 1925 to outlaw it. The only people to have used this monstrous weapon since then have been Benito Mussolini against the Ethiopians in the 1930s, Adolf Hitler in his war against the Jews in the 1940s, and Saddam Hussein in his massacre of the Kurds in the 1980s.

How about the fanatical religious terrorists, Aum Shinriyko, who released Sarin gas into Tokyo’s subway in 1995?  Don’t they count because they were an evil cult rather than an evil regime?

The re-emergence of this foul weapon in the Damascus suburb ought to have – especially as we prepare to commemorate the centenary of the outbreak of the Great War – brought together the House of Commons in solemn support of the Prime Minister’s commendable efforts to punish Assad for taking it out of history’s Pandora’s Box and unleashing it on his own people.

The Prime Minister’s commendable efforts to punish someone whose guilt has only been proven in the court of Australian giant marsupialism Obama his opinion?  For once the HoC did the right thing.  There is nothing commendable about Cameron’s efforts to push us into a war where both sides are as evil as each other.

Yet instead Mr Cameron’s initiative, which stood foursquare in the historical tradition of previous prime ministers faced with such a crime, was voted down. Have we really been so traumatised by the decision to go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003 that we cannot even fire a few missiles at a vicious dictator like Assad? If so, Britain’s days as a power that deserves its prominent position in Nato and the United Nations Security Council are going to come to an end.

But we won’t be firing them at Assad.  We’ll be firing them at a city where people live.  And we will be doing it in support of Sunni terrorists rebels who are every bit as vicious as Assad and are as equally capable of using Sarin gas.  For all we know they may already have.

Our ineptitude is compounded by U.S president Barack Obama’s decisive statement last night that military strikes are needed. Yes, he is seeking congressional authority. But he has also declared that he will take unilateral action and ‘confront the menace’ alone.

Obama, no matter how tumescent for war he becomes, is going to have to consult Congress first and Congress seems so concerned about the urgency of the situation it isn’t going to convene and discuss the matter until 9th September when hopefully the information regarding the identity of the guilty parties will be more robust.  If Congress follows the UK’s lead and says no will that make the Yanks global spectating, bagel-eating surrender monkeys in Roberts’ gimlet eyes?

And what of the quality of Obama’s leadership?  This is the man who took fourteen days to admit the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, that took the lives of four American citizens including the US ambassador, was a planned and efficiently executed terrorist attack and not due to a mob enraged by by a pathetic film called Innocence of Muslims.  Suddenly he knows exactly who the Syrian CW culprits are before anyone has had a chance to actually investigate what happened?  And we are all yoghurt knitting traitors for not bowing down to The One’s prescience on all matters Middle East?

Of course there are plenty of Britons who would love to see Britain relegated to the sidelines of world history, and simply opt for the quiet life. All too often, we see on Twitter, Facebook, and blogs, a new generation who want Britain to become just another minor power that watches events from the sidelines: another Norway, Japan, Sweden or Ireland. Somewhere that likes to be liked. Lovely countries all, but they do not matter on the world stage like Britain did – until Thursday night.

That’s bollocks on steroids.  The people of this country will fight tooth and nail to protect their own against invasion no matter what bilge they spout on Twatter or Farcebook.  What we are sick to death of is brain-dead, glory hunting, self-aggrandising politicians getting us involved in wars we have no business poking our noses into especially when we don’t have an ice crystal’s chance in hell of either winning or improving the situation by bombing stuff and hoping for the best.  We already know from bitter experience that this strategy doesn’t work.

I could continue to fisk Roberts’ dross but what would be the point?  It seems that Roberts’ main gripe is that the so called, very one-sided “special relationship” has been fatally compromised.  He thinks that because the majority of people in Britain are against intervention in Syria, with or without proof, its because we are all traitors in the Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden mould.  He fails to consider that we’re Scammelling sick of bankrolling and fighting foreign wars that improve nothing, solve nothing, achieve nothing and come at a cost in lives politicians and their families rarely, if ever, have to pay.

Ever since the initial footage of an unconfirmed CW attack was released onto YouTube the US and UK governments have been arguing the case for “punishing” Assad because the “rebels” couldn’t possibly have obtained a CW (Sarin gas) and deployed it. If Sarin gas is so hard to obtain, unless you are a tyrannical government, how did the religious fanatics of Aum Shinrikyo managed to get hold of enough of the stuff to launch not one but two attacks before they were caught?

The first attack, in 1994 killed seven people and injured five hundred.  The second attack came in 1995, when Sarin gas was released into the Tokyo subway during the morning rush hour.  Eight people died  and thousands were injured, many critically.  It remains the worst terrorist atrocity to take place on Japanese soil.  So who supplied the cult with CW?  Some rogue state?  No.  They manufactured it themselves in a laboratory.  Is it such a huge leap to believe that Islamic terrorists, who we know can manufacture Ricin, also have the knowledge to manufacture Sarin gas?  After all, the poison has been around since 1938 so the procedure can’t be that complicated.

To point the finger at Assad alone is disingenuous.  It is a dangerous lie to insist that only the Assad regime has the capability to possess and deploy CWs in Syria.  To go ahead and launch missiles using this deeply suspect presumption as a justification  is nothing less than a war crime.

Hysterical warmongering aside, no must mean no.  We’ve had enough of this false prospectus, interventionist BS.  End of.

 

11 Comments

  1. john in cheshire says:

    If one wanted to inflict a condign punishment (tautology, sorry) then I would wish Mr Roberts lives to see the consequence of his beliefs.

  2. john in cheshire says:

    Oh, and I don’t consider Bradley Manning or Edward Snowden as traitors; If they had been Englishmen and had done the same thing, I would have lauded them just the same. Criminal behaviour is not compromised either by nationality or by who is the employer.

  3. Lynne says:

    JiC, I don’t have an opinion on either Manning or Snowden. I was using the examples of perceived treachery that Roberts himself made in the article.

  4. NickM says:

    My vague understanding is that Sarin and VX date from WWII and can be made by someone with an A-Level in chemistry in a kitchen. I have both. So arrest me. It’s the whole WMD delusion yet again. Yeah, nukes are cool (but they are physics so of course they are) but chemical an bio-weapons are a bit gay but they get conflated. by twats as WMDs. A big hydrogen bomb would flatten all of NYC, London, Moscow, Istanbul, Paris…

    Nukes are world-changing. As I once saw in a lecture theatre in the chemistry department of Newcastle University was graffiti which read “chem is wank”. Too true!

    Perhaps more to the point can we honestly call certain weapons beyond the pale? Is it worse to be gassed to death than being shot,stabbed, beaten, burnt?

    Ask the Tutsis. They were primarily killed with machetes and matches. Nothing banned anywhere. Half a million of them.

    Or ask me. I know how many died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I know how they died but I have worked at HMRC, Longbenton. 13,000 of me processing NIC stuff. You know why it did that? It was built as a hospital for the projected casualties of Operation Olympic, the invasion of Japan. Of course this didn’t happen. A Little Boy and a Fat Man prevented that and saved over a million lives. Try telling that to a Japanese – most of the lives would have been theirs – they were training 14 year-old schoolgirls to use bamboo spears against US Marines and British Paras (and the Aussies, Canadians and all the rest). Oh and Comrade Joe was moving divisions East – so the Soviets would have a piece of the pie.

    Weapons are not the issue. Intent is. Rwanda was an industrial-scale genocide with household objects. Hiroshima was the ending of the most horrific war ever by tech.

    One I approve of. One horrified me. It was the utter tech-shock of the nukes that meant the Japanese could surrender. I would not want to watch the beaches of Yokohama flow red to please those who believe some weapons are beyond the pale in principle.

    I also note that nobody has gone nuclear since 1945. People have done appalling things since but the ultimate weapon has killed nobody. More people have been killed with table-knives.

  5. John Galt says:

    Have to agree with pretty much all the sentiments stated above, Lynne.

    Britain’s role as “…world’s foremost moral policemen…” was always the most ridiculous cant, especially since our fueling of religious, tribal and racial divisions was a foundation of the late British Empire. A preposterous presumption of patronising contempt that we are well rid of.

    It is no longer Britain’s role to be a referee and guarantor of peace amongst the darkies. If the yanks see it as their place to do so then on their heads be it. Personally I would leave it to the likes of the Arab League and the African Union, two talking shops where the pointlessness of responsibility without capability are clear for all to see. The role of Eunuchs since time immemorial.

    Why should anyone be the worlds policeman?

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  6. Mr Ed says:

    But what would the chattering journalists write and talk about if we said to the World ‘Goods In at Harwich, Dover, Bristol, Tilbury or Hull, or other ports by private arrangement, everyone who is a drain can pay their own way, and foreign criminals can leave or be put in coracles 500 miles off St Helena. We aren’t sorry for any inonvenience, please take some redundant bureaucrats off our hands, and there are Tridents trained on Buenos Aires and Madrid shoud there be any nonsense.’?

  7. RAB says:

    Great minds Lynne. Bit of an overlap on our posts today, but hey that’s the great thing about Counting Cats, independent thought synchronizing. Lovely bit of Fisking again, by the way.

  8. MickC says:

    Andrew Roberts is as much a historian as a Starbucks is a coffee.

    Same name, entirely different product.

  9. Paul Marks says:

    Actually the Assad regime (not him personally – he is actually a bit of a puppet) has gassed people (quite a few times).

    However, Mr Roberts has missed the basic point.

    Who are we supposed to help to power in Syria?

    In Italy and Germany (after World War II) it was the Christian Democrats – in Japan it was the two parties that (eventually) joined forces and became the LDP.

    And in Syria it is …..

    Well WHO exactly?

    The Black Flag forces of AQ?

  10. Mr Ed says:

    @ Paul, wasn’t there a ‘gay’ girl in Damascus? The Syrian Twitterati should be in charge. Oh, hang on, that was fake.

    In Assad senior, the most ruthless sonnofabitch for 500 miles (perhaps more) popped up and seized power. His legacy is not a bed of rose petals.

  11. Mike Mellor says:

    I can’t make out the meaning of this sentence. Is it written in the Anguish Languish?

    A huge cultural shift has taken place in our country and historians of the future will focus on Thursday night, in the House of Commons, as the time that the new Britain emerged in all its hideous, amoral selfishness.

    Or is it an entry for the Bulwer-Lytton Prize?

    Or was this written not by a human but by an electric sheep named Andy Roid?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: