[slackline]

Can somebody kindly explain why Milliband has been singled out in this appalling BBC News article?

Proper gander perhaps

[SA Chris]

It's not easy being leader of the opposition. There is always a conga line of trouble waiting at your office door. You're never far away from disagreement.

Sums it up really.

[tomtom]

It's not easy being leader of the opposition. There is always a conga line of trouble waiting at your office door. You're never far away from disagreement.

Sums it up really.

I disagree.

TBH, this reflects what a shower of shit Milliband has been as an opposition leader. The 'opposition' to this government have had the easiest job of any opposition I can remember. The govt has made gaffe after gaffe, several U turns, decimated the Lib Dem vote, had a raft of unpopular policies - and Labour have completely failed to capitalise.

What a fuck up he has been. I expect he's a nice bloke - has decent values and ideas, but as a leader he's a fucking joke. The present Labour leadership have GIFTED the Tories the next election....
   

[SA Chris]

True he is pretty shit, but doesn't make what I've said wrong.

[tomtom]

True he is pretty shit, but doesn't make what I've said wrong.

Ach - I'm not disagreeing with you say exactly - but often opposition have an easier job as they can just react to what the Govt is or isnt doing.. sure come election time they have to up their game - but they can afford to be more reactive rather than pro-active...

[Sloper]

Can someboy kindly explain why Milliband has been singled out in this appaling BBC News article?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27829958

90% of the piece is directed against Millipede, with Clegg just about managing to get a slight chastisement at the end, despite the fact that Hillsborough is in his constituency. The Conservative commentator then used this as a reason to describe the Labour leader as weak.

WTF? All the party leaders posed with the rag. Why not slag them all off?

Is Hillsborough in his consituency? I don't think so.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_Hallam_(UK_Parliament_constituency) Also Miliband is the one who's made such a big deal about distancing himself from Murdoch and also err Liverpool is predominately a Labour stronghold, that's why it's a dropped bollock.

[psychomansam]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-27681560

Christian fundamentalism in the UK

[Falling Down]

What Sloper said....

A lot of Labour MPs (Burnham etc) have been actively involved in the JFT96 campaign and have been very vocal (Tom Watson) in the anti-Murdoch agenda so he's dropped a massive bollock with his own party. 

It's also picking up on the "I never read newspapers, I'm more interested in American politics" interview he gave recently. 

He looks uncomfortable every time he tries to do something "normal".  Worse than Gordon Brown did.   A Westminster political policy wonk in every way imaginable.

[Falling Down]

Events in Iraq are properly scary... It's going to be a nightmare.

[Oldmanmatt]

Events in Iraq are properly scary... It's going to be a nightmare.

Reserve liability has expired, so they can't recall me. Yea!

(Not that an ageing overweight git like me would have much to offer).

That seems like the only moderately good thing I can think of about that.

Shouldn't we do something about it though?

[mrjonathanr]

CAIRO, 15 September 2004 — Arab League chief Amr Moussa

“The gates of hell are open in Iraq,” Moussa said in his opening speech, ”

He said it pre-invasion in 2002. And subsequently. It sounds dramatic, but looking at the news,  the 250,000 recorded deaths,  I can't imagine this isn't going to get worse and worse. How is Iraq not going to disintegrate completely?

The poor people born there.

[mrjonathanr]

Events in Iraq are properly scary... It's going to be a nightmare.

Shouldn't we do something about it though?

OMM. Doing something sounds good, but that supposes something worthwhile could be done. ??

I'm very ignorant of history but since the partition of the area it's been very unstable if not under dictatorship, surely? Syria - civil war. Iraq - on the brink. Egypt , Libya - internal conflict. And what of Palestine? Containing chaos strikes me as very difficult to do, especially with fighters who believe their death is the entry to paradise.

[psychomansam]

Events in Iraq are properly scary... It's going to be a nightmare.

Shouldn't we do something about it though?

OMM. Doing something sounds good, but that supposes something worthwhile could be done. ??

To suggest we should do something about it implies that A. A foreign power meddling could improve things (try looking at the history here) and B. We/anyone is a foreign power disinterested (unselfish) enough to actually achieve what putatively could be done.

I see the first belief as hugely optimistic, and the second belief as woefully mistaken arrogance.
Consider for instance that prior to the last invasion, the pentagon built plans on how to rebuild Iraq for stability. After invasion, this was thrown out and all rebuilding work was given to US contractors, thus further devastating the local economy.

Mrjonathonr points to religion as a major factor and I'm sure it's helpful for morale among their fighters, but I know the evidence in Afghanistan is that the majority of young people being in unemployment (we burnt and banned the only profitable crop) means they join the Taliban just because it's the only job. I suspect the situation in Iraq isn't too dissimilar.

I suspect Sloper is going to come on shortly to suggest we should be looking to make reparations for our last illegal invasion, perhaps by funding some manufacturing there and investing in trade with them?

[tomtom]

I think we may well have seen the end of Iraq as a nation state (albeit one drawn up by British cartographers way back when). Aside from the Sunni Shia conflict - this provides the Kurds with the ideal opportunity to gain ground and make the case for their own state. And why not I guess - they already have a semi autonomous state - that seems to be the most stable part of Iraq...

The ISIS spread is scary - and the stories coming out about beheading of enemies, and other horror stories are grim reading. I'm not sure there is much anyone can do here - if has the feeling that the genie is out of the bottle...

[psychomansam]

 

[Oldmanmatt]

Chaos tends to spread.

Doing something does not necessarily mean military intervention Sam.
Neither does it preclude it.

I've yet to hear you suggest any practical (or otherwise) solution to such problems? Do you advocate ignoring it?

Having had first hand experience of the chaos that was Eastern European Communism I have no faith what so ever in such a system.
I also have firsthand experience of the Mid-East conflict having served in Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon (HR), and operations in Israel/Palestine.
I spent most of '90 in Turkey/Kurdistan (pre round one GW during desert shield). Coupled with an extended stint in that sectarian hell that was Yugoslavia (an extension to the Mid-East conflict); the one thing I can promise you and the only thing I claim to understand about any of it, is that we have to do something.
We are always blamed for the problems, but they run so much deeper and we (the West) are just a convenient scapegoat.

We screw up every time we try to intervene, because we are always looking for quick solutions.

No, simple investment won't help. It will just disappear into a very few pockets on it's way to Switzerland.

It requires,IMO, a global paradigm shift.

Start with abolishing Tax havens and secret banking?

[psychomansam]

Chaos tends to spread.

Doing something does not necessarily mean military intervention Sam.
Neither does it preclude it.

I've yet to hear you suggest any practical (or otherwise) solution to such problems? Do you advocate ignoring it?

Having had first hand experience of the chaos that was Eastern European Communism I have no faith what so ever in such a system.
I also have firsthand experience of the Mid-East conflict having served in Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon (HR), and operations in Israel/Palestine.
I spent most of '90 in Turkey/Kurdistan (pre round one GW during desert shield). Coupled with an extended stint in that sectarian hell that was Yugoslavia (an extension to the Mid-East conflict); the one thing I can promise you and the only thing I claim to understand about any of it, is that we have to do something.
We are always blamed for the problems, but they run so much deeper and we (the West) are just a convenient scapegoat.

We screw up every time we try to intervene, because we are always looking for quick solutions.

No, simple investment won't help. It will just disappear into a very few pockets on it's way to Switzerland.

It requires,IMO, a global paradigm shift.

Start with abolishing Tax havens and secret banking?

I would suggest that it's the problems caused by (largely Western) foreign interventionism which run far deeper.

I wasn't suggesting 'simple' investment either. I would suggest investment needs to be run from the ground up in the form of small-scale start up costs for small and family businesses, along with guaranteed purchase of goods for export. But that's just one suggestion. There's shit-loads that can be done, if done carefully with real local consultation. But it costs money, it's rarely sexy, takes times and always carries risks of corruption - you just have to minimise that as best you can. No foreign government is willing to do this, because it doesn't earn them anything in return. (Unlike, say, ingratiating yourself to the central government with aid, in exchange for them buying our goods(arms/drugs)/services/taking high-interest loans).
I know it's difficult to get right, but we're not really trying. One of my brothers worked for the government in international development. He basically described the whole thing as a totally  self-serving enterprise, a farce. We're just not interested in 'helping' other countries unless we get something in return, generally financially, although it might also be political kudos or an ego-trip.

Yes, we certainly need a global paradigm shift. We accuse these governments in unstable countries of corruption while largely failing to notice that the international system we want to subject them to politically and economically is totally undemocratic, corrupt, immoral and unjust.

Here's the West supporting justice, peace and prosperity in Pakistan:
http://londonprogressivejournal.com/article/view/1313/why-drone-assassinations-just-dont-work
http://londonprogressivejournal.com/article/view/1846/north-waziristan-suffers-a-fierce-bombardment-civilians-traumatized-by-air-strikes

[Sloper]

One of the problems with Iraq (as opposed to Iran) is that it has not had a functioning civil state since perhaps er ever.  A civil state is not something that can be imposed.

The difficulty is that there was never going to be a stable and gradual transition from the Ba'athist regime to a functioning civill society nor was this going to be achieved simply via regime change.

We have to remember that the traditions of democracy and the civil state took centuries to develop in Europe and would be foolish to expect them to be founded in the middle east in a decade or three.

ISIS and their ilk draw succor from the despotic regimes in the region and until those regimes shift their approach to governance these groups are likely to continue to have significant influence.  Of all the states that change start to make this shift Iran is the forerunner and we should be engaging more with the Iranians in this regard.

[psychomansam]

One of the problems with Iraq (as opposed to Iran) is that it has not had a functioning civil state since perhaps er ever.  A civil state is not something that can be imposed.

The difficulty is that there was never going to be a stable and gradual transition from the Ba'athist regime to a functioning civill society nor was this going to be achieved simply via regime change.

We have to remember that the traditions of democracy and the civil state took centuries to develop in Europe and would be foolish to expect them to be founded in the middle east in a decade or three.

ISIS and their ilk draw succor from the despotic regimes in the region and until those regimes shift their approach to governance these groups are likely to continue to have significant influence.  Of all the states that change start to make this shift Iran is the forerunner and we should be engaging more with the Iranians in this regard.

Shit. I think we might agree on something here. Good points.
I'd add that one of the problems is that Western nation-states believe that the only route to 'progress' is to be a Western nation-state.

I think a good study of 'The Player of Games' by Iain M Banks (RIP) and 'Dune' should be a mandatory prerequisite for this discussion. 

[lagerstarfish]

I was wondering about alternatives to drones

Seeing as they get used in areas of minimal wealth and living conditions, surely it would be pretty cheap to get someone to sell-out their morals and stuff and be recruited to do the killing? It'd probably be more accurate, involve fewer side effects and possibly cost less.

[Oldmanmatt]

One of the problems with Iraq (as opposed to Iran) is that it has not had a functioning civil state since perhaps er ever.  A civil state is not something that can be imposed.

The difficulty is that there was never going to be a stable and gradual transition from the Ba'athist regime to a functioning civill society nor was this going to be achieved simply via regime change.

We have to remember that the traditions of democracy and the civil state took centuries to develop in Europe and would be foolish to expect them to be founded in the middle east in a decade or three.

ISIS and their ilk draw succor from the despotic regimes in the region and until those regimes shift their approach to governance these groups are likely to continue to have significant influence.  Of all the states that change start to make this shift Iran is the forerunner and we should be engaging more with the Iranians in this regard.

Shit. I think we might agree on something here. Good points.
I'd add that one of the problems is that Western nation-states believe that the only route to 'progress' is to be a Western nation-state.

I think a good study of 'The Player of Games' by Iain M Banks (RIP) and 'Dune' should be a mandatory prerequisite for this discussion. 

Player of Games certainly...

What would be nice? Genuine, binding, International Law and an effective UN; democratically elected reps (the elected heads of state?), with a multinational enforcement arm (under firm civilian control).

Sorry guys, but I don't find the thought of world Government so terrifying.

Mind you, Election Day would be a bit of a bugger...

[Sloper]

Sorry but I do find the idea of 'world government' terrifying for a whole number of reasons, the first problem would be that the government would be so unresponsive that what was right for the majority would be disastrous for the fringes, the government would be massively inefficient and necessarily undemocratic. 

It's hard enough with the EU, scale this up x6 with the disparities in wealth, political freedoms and national identities and the whole thing suddenly looks as credible as me flashing 8A and running a 4 minute mile and sub 2:30 marathon.

[Oldmanmatt]

Sorry but I do find the idea of 'world government' terrifying for a whole number of reasons, the first problem would be that the government would be so unresponsive that what was right for the majority would be disastrous for the fringes, the government would be massively inefficient and necessarily undemocratic. 

It's hard enough with the EU, scale this up x6 with the disparities in wealth, political freedoms and national identities and the whole thing suddenly looks as credible as me flashing 8A and running a 4 minute mile and sub 2:30 marathon.

Well, this is very much a hypothetical World Government.
More flight of fancy, than remote expectation.

A common law for humanity.

Something above politics or tribal customs.

Something based on an enforceable, secular, set of international Laws; which precluded any difference or lack of political freedom.

IMO this is where the human race will eventually arrive, IF, WE DON'T destroy ourselves in the name of petty National pride and difference in superstitions/voodoo/religion/spiritual/fairy tale believing crap first.

I'd be much happier to see International conflict slugged out in a courtroom, than a battlefield!

Despite previous assertions cast in the direction of the legal profession, vis-a-vis general money grabbing/sell their own Granny/mercenary/Sloper trolling type stuff...

[Sloper]

A slightly more plausible proposition than socialism resulting in equality, prosperity and freedom.

[mrjonathanr]

 OMM Something like the UN and The Hague, up scaled...
Sloper. Some sensible comments, till the last snarky bit there..

I'd agree with a lot of what has been said about Genies and bottles and the dearth of civic traditions. Sounds like Iraq security and govt has been tribal behaviours dressed in Western kit.

I think that the worst of all possible scenarios is imaginable: pan Arab Sunni-Shi'a civil war. Looking after your tribe like Maliki has done (apparently) deepens sectarian  divisions and mistrust and makes the Sunni population receptive to ISIS's message. If the West can foster a more collaborative outlook in the allied governments (Iraq, Israel) that path might lead somewhere.

Bizarre to think of Iran as an ally but in this context, there it is.