political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Monday, April 02, 2007
Iran to Have Nukes? No Thanks
There is one huge lesson that we can all take from the Iranian hostage crisis. That on no account must these people be allowed to have nuclear weapons. No ifs, no buts. Never.
Yes I agree. Nuclear weapons must never be in the hands of countries who have no respect for international norms, or international law.
As Iran threatens Britain by showing it's sailors on TV. Whilst Britain and the USA, threaten the lifes of ordinary Iranians by suggesting economic sanctions to cut off their liveihoods. Sanctions never seem to make politicans suffer do they?
If this 'incident' has taught us anything, it is that we can do 'zip' about it. This hostage taking was a 'kite-flying' exercise to judge what the reaction in the West would be.
Britain is pretty het-up, the EU have made some encouraging noises, the UN have done less than nothing, although the US President has made clear how displeased he is.
What say Iran go down the route which Iraq was inaccurately alleged to, namely buying 'yellowcake' uranium from Niger ? Well, we did not exactly have a lot to say about that at the time, although it was used much later as part of the case for war against Iraq.
So Iran know that we wouldn't bomb their facilities.
They know that the UN wouldn't do very much. They might sanction some force [eventually] but someone else would have to rustle up an UNPROFOR [protection force]. Who I wonder ?
They know that the EU will not lift a finger, as most of the countries who are also part of NATO either won't supply troops, or if they do it will be like Afghanistan, where they aren't allowed out at night.
The Iranians know that there will be no vote to use force against Iran, when Dubya could only just get a vote for his 'surge' in Iraq through under severe opposition from Pelosi and the Democrats.
There may be sanctions. Well again, the received wisdom before the Iraq war was that Saddam might have been able to acquire WMD despite all the sanctions. That wasn't actually the case, but it does show that no-one believed the sanctions were having much effect.
Except on millions of kids deprived of medicine and vaccinations. Wake up and smell the coffee. We are in the process of sleep-walking to a nuclear armed Iran. But look on the bright side, they are at least a long, long way away..
To be honest this situation shows how powerless we have become. We sided with Europe and lost our influence; we sided with the US and lost our influence. We seem to have no independence or ability to threaten the Iranains.
On the scale of inlfuenctial nations, where the UK rank? Well below Iran for starters...
So we turned our back on the Commonwealth, Europe has effectively turned its back on the UK. The UK/USA is like a frightened battered wife relationship - the USA can treat as it wishes as it knows we will never do anything about it and they are arrognantly confident that we will always be "by their side" and they do nothing to help us when we need it.
Thank goodness you have sorted that then.Perhaps you could list those good countries which you would allow to have nukes,list those bad countries which you would not allow to have nukes,list countries which you will consider allowing to have nukes if they ask you nicely.What steps would you take if one of the countries you had decreed should be nuke free had been found to have nukes,nuke the crap out of them perhaps we have the nukes thanks be to folk like you.
Hello we met over at Guidos' a couple of days ago,I said in a reply to one of your moronic postings that I found your blog name and you to be offensive,I still do you bigot.
I agree with the comments here about Britain's weakness, effectively the UK is now quite unable to defend its own soldiers when taken hostage by another power in the Gulf and Iran is having a propaganda field day. One really does have to question if it is responsible now for the British to continue to deploy troops in the region. Our soldiers deserve better than this pathetic surrender. By now I suspect if it had been US soldiers Tehran would be enjoying some "shock and awe" and Ahmedinajad would be crouching in a bomb shelter. Note the utterly pathetic reaction of most of our parliamentarians as well. At the height of this crisis, Parliament was obsessing over - the casino issue. The current cabinet, British government system and official ministry of defence are not fit to be deploying armies overseas. My guess is that the British Army soldier will now be convinced that their own government are pathetic, incompetent, weak, surrender monkeys.
Anonymous said...7:52 PM By now I suspect if it had been US soldiers Tehran would be enjoying some "shock and awe" and Ahmedinajad would be crouching in a bomb shelter.
If I had posted such a cretinous comment I would also be anonymous ,a few too many war films daft lad.
Why shouldn't Iran have nukes? It has never attacked another country, which is something the nuclear-armed USA, Britain and particularly Israel cannot claim. Iranians died in their thousands fighting against Saddam Hussein. Whay are you so anti-Iranian, Iain?
This sounds more Kilroy Silk than Iain Dale. No, whatever happens, we don’t want those scummy Iranians getting hold of a technology which is rightfully ours alone.
Some of the comments on this thread are a joke. I am not being anti Iranian, I am being anti the Iranian government. They're a bunch of lunatics. If you seriously would be happy for them to have nuclear weapons then you're as much of a lunatic as Ahmandinijad.
Anonymous writes Yes I agree. Nuclear weapons must never be in the hands of countries who have no respect for international norms, or international law.
Is it fair to assume that the entire population of Iran is 100% behind President Ahmandinijad and the few "rent-a-nutter" types who demonstrated outside the British Embassy in Tehran this weekend?
(Consider what percentage of UK adults voted for Tony Blair at the last election and you can see how easy it is for unpopular politicians to cling on to power.)
From what I read, it is only a matter of time before Ahmandinijad is thrown out of power by his own people.
Until that happy day, "jaw jaw will always be better than war war."
With all due respect Iain, what a load of bullocks!
You may recall I asked about this during one of your shows, your commentators gave a fairly generic answer basically saying "we're a better country with a stronger value system than the ragheads".
I quite frankly disagree.
If they want nukes, none of our business, just as its not their business if we have them.
Anyone who does NOT believe that we are a better country than Iran with a better value system than them, should quite frankly p-off and join them, as I fail to see how such people are "adding value" to this country in any way.
"One rule for 'us' and one for 'them' eh?" This is the thinking left's modern equivalent of "Peace in our time". Bit like saying we must have a level playing field with the Nazis because otherwise it's not fair. Just shows that there will always be dickheads in every generation........
OK, here's something we can probably all agree on...........
Yes that's for you to give us all a break and stop posting for a year or two.
professor hemlock said...You're on the right track, but we have to be prepared to negotiate harder...
If they get tough, we can always throw in "Mike" to show good will.
Unlike the boring beyond belief verity you appear to have a sense of humour,you are a very funny man,you make me laugh.
Anonymous said...
Clearly some of these idiots have no idea how grave a threat iran is.
Thankfully we have an idiot like you who does.
Tom Tyler said...I totally agree, the Iranian regime must not be allowed nuclear weapons.Of course, there is only one way to prevent them, and it ain't diplomacy.
What is it then Tom do tell, nothing I like more than a silly twerp like you giving us all the benefit of your long experience as a blogger.
Why, Mike, I am more than glad to tell you. The solution is, as I said, not diplomacy, but to cower, grovel, snivel and apologise unreservedly to Iran for even existing. And to get Coldplay to write a nice song about Iran. Yeah! That way, they will see that we are very nice people, not like BushaliburtonChimpHitler and all those nasty evil men who do naughty things like war and stuff. I'll be on acoustic guitar, you can sing and be on bongos. That will show them who has the moral high ground, oh yes.
I've always been in the "Let them have them" camp on Iran and Nukes, I disagree fundamentally with the way we dictate what people should do like we have some right to do so. However, this past week has shown that Iran has dangerous intent towards the UK, it's pushing it, it's playing hardball even before they have nukes, humiliating the UK. Therefore it is in interests of our national security that they don't get them. This is not Iraq, Iraq wasn't attacking us, Sadaam wasn't even indulging in rhetoric any more, he was whimpering and trying desperately to prove to the UN that he had no WMD. Iran on the other hand are ramping up the Rhetoric and seizing our soldiers. They're a clear danger therefore it's common sense for us to do what we can to stop them having Nuclear capability.
Luckily while we may sit by idly, I can't see Israel letting Iran get Nukes without some major strategic strikes to try to stop them, and as long as it ain't bombing civilians I'm right behind them on it.
anon 7:08pm "The Iranians know that there will be no vote to use force against Iran" Absolutely, bang on target! - the Iranians have timed this one quite carefully - Bush n' Blair on the way out, being replaced by Democrats (US) and lefties (NuLab) - ageing kids (Hillary n' Brown) who are both pro-motherhood/apple pie/1960s/70s Chou En Lai non-aligned peace-loving peoples /hippy Coca Cola Internationale lotsatax - but none of it for armed defence.
A weak and majority anti-US/UK UN led by another weak tax-paid 'anti-colonialist'. An EU led by Germany n' France (both with juicy trade deals with Iran they won't have threatened), Iraq fatigue throughout the west (incl. UK/US/Aus voters). Defence spending at an all-time low. Maritime law something your grandad told you about, like the Beatles' new LP.
So it's 'Hey Iran, come in and make yourselves at home' time, innit?
Unless.
Unless we decide we need more conventional protection against Iran to prevent WWIII breaking out with a nuclear strike. We could rebuild the Navy, and re-equip the Army.
Oh no, surely not, why would we need to spend money on that? Maternity leave, equal pay, more lawyers, more local lesbian facilities in Camden, that's what we need.
You decide, people of the UK.
Freedom, or Slavery. And no, it hasn't been abolished yet. Not for you.
professor hemlock - by goodness I think the boy's cracked it ! that mountain of unsold Blunkett memoirs !
We just have to get the HMS Coventry to ship out the millions of copies to plug up the Shatt-al-Arab. Flooding the entire delta area and making the arguments over what is international water a lot less pressing for Iran than wondering how they are going to stop their country from disappearing under the sea...
Iain, the Iranian government are not "a bunch of lunatics. They are extremely rational political actors.
They live in a "tough neighbourhood", they have US troops or allies on almost every border, plus Israel is nuclear armed (I am not criticising Israel per se).
The Iranian government has seen what works from the North Korea situation - brinkmanship. They are also not a monolith. Some elements say things for domestic consumption, just like in other countries.
Whatever other job you get in a future Conservative government, I fervently hope it's nowhere near the FCO or Defence!
Anon 7.08.Good sense from beginning to end. Unfortunately the whole country is being handed over to people like "Mike".
Who is handing the country over to people like me you nincompoop ?
Tom Tyler said...
Why, Mike, I am more than glad to tell you.
You rambled on but gave no coherent answer what would you do, would you go to war,nuke them what,just tell me without being silly what would you do Tom ?
Yes, I am talking about going to war against Iran, and using whatever weapons it may take (including nukes if need be) to destroy their nuclear programme. Grow up, mate. John Lennon's "Imagine" is for nursery school.
Yes, I am talking about going to war against Iran, and using whatever weapons it may take (including nukes if need be) to destroy their nuclear programme.
How many dead would be acceptable to achieve your aim and what other countries with nuclear ambitions would you take out next ?
Difficult to say, Mike. Certainly 7.1 million at least (as judging from Ahmadinejad's statements, that would seem to be the cost of allowing Iran to obtain nukes, as measured in Israeli lives).
Where else? Certainly any country whose name ends in "-stan" that seeks nukes is a priority for preventative action.
Difficult to say, Mike. Certainly 7.1 million at least (as judging from Ahmadinejad's statements, that would seem to be the cost of allowing Iran to obtain nukes, as measured in Israeli lives).
Where else? Certainly any country whose name ends in "-stan" that seeks nukes is a priority for preventative action.
They don't want them, anyway. Their Supreme Leader has even issued a fatwa against them.
Like the non-existent Iraqi WMD, the non-existent Iranian nuclear weapons programme is just a ruse, a Straussian lie, to annex an oil-rich country to the global hegemony, in this case also, as Yugoslavia was, an emerging multi-ethnic democracy while retaining that independence.
>as I fail to see how such people are "adding value" to this country in any way.
See Tom, its that kind of outlook which make this country the moral vacuum it truly is.
Do try to remember that the citizen is not answerable to the state or other citizens. They have no need to justify themselves or their existence.
On a more personal level, given the circumstances, I would happily leaves these shores for good.
Knowing many people who fought in WW2, they didn't fight for this bastardised, self centred, oppressive nation.
The UK has well and truly peaked and is rapidly going downhill in any way you look at it.
I'm looking forward to the rise of India & China, hopefully It might bring some people in this country back to earth.
As for Iran, well, who knows the truth? If the British government are to be believed (and I find no reason to do so), then they should have taken a much firmer approach. As it is, we look weak and unsure of our position.
If Iran are right, then these people should be put on trial, just as I would hope we'd do the same in this country...
...oh, thats right, we actually allow countries such as the US to install their massive surveillance capability on our shores so they can snoop into the citizens and commerce of Europe and Russia.
Perhaps slightly off-message, but those who are able and wish to do something about the hostage crisis in Iran, ‘Free the Navy 15/Hostages’ is a group of like-minded individuals who decided it was about time the Iranian Government saw how outraged the British public are about the kidnapping of our service personnel, and their exploitation as propaganda tools. They have a website at http://freethenavy15.blogspot.com/.
It's their aim to organise regular protests outside the Iranian Embassy in London (16, Prince's Gate, South Kensington, London, SW7 1PT, for those joining them!). These protests aren't affiliated to any political party, or about anything more than getting our sailors and Marines freed.
No matter what your views on the wider situation in the Middle East, I hope you'll join them to campaign against this kidnapping.
The next protest is at 6.45pm today, Wednesday, 4 April 2007.
So Keith, our once great nation which held off and repelled the German Army, Navy and Luftwaffe are now reduced to stamping their feet outside a foreign embassy.
What a sad state of affairs.
The victorious crap coming out of Downing Street is sickening.
We had no clout, no power, no authority and no credibility.
Thank you to both the Tories & Labour for allowing this to happen. All politicians must feel proud of themselves.
55 comments:
Most of your blog is now in ITALICS, Iain. Is that a mistake, or do you wish to emphasize it all indiscriminately?
Yes I agree. Nuclear weapons must never be in the hands of countries who have no respect for international norms, or international law.
As Iran threatens Britain by showing it's sailors on TV. Whilst Britain and the USA, threaten the lifes of ordinary Iranians by suggesting economic sanctions to cut off their liveihoods. Sanctions never seem to make politicans suffer do they?
LBS, not on my screen it's not. I italicise quotes sometimes.
But how will we stop them ?
If this 'incident' has taught us anything, it is that we can do 'zip' about it. This hostage taking was a 'kite-flying' exercise to judge what the reaction in the West would be.
Britain is pretty het-up, the EU have made some encouraging noises, the UN have done less than nothing, although the US President has made clear how displeased he is.
What say Iran go down the route which Iraq was inaccurately alleged to, namely buying 'yellowcake' uranium from Niger ? Well, we did not exactly have a lot to say about that at the time, although it was used much later as part of the case for war against Iraq.
So Iran know that we wouldn't bomb their facilities.
They know that the UN wouldn't do very much. They might sanction some force [eventually] but someone else would have to rustle up an UNPROFOR [protection force]. Who I wonder ?
They know that the EU will not lift a finger, as most of the countries who are also part of NATO either won't supply troops, or if they do it will be like Afghanistan, where they aren't allowed out at night.
The Iranians know that there will be no vote to use force against Iran, when Dubya could only just get a vote for his 'surge' in Iraq through under severe opposition from Pelosi and the Democrats.
There may be sanctions. Well again, the received wisdom before the Iraq war was that Saddam might have been able to acquire WMD despite all the sanctions. That wasn't actually the case, but it does show that no-one believed the sanctions were having much effect.
Except on millions of kids deprived of medicine and vaccinations. Wake up and smell the coffee. We are in the process of sleep-walking to a nuclear armed Iran. But look on the bright side, they are at least a long, long way away..
To be honest this situation shows how powerless we have become. We sided with Europe and lost our influence; we sided with the US and lost our influence. We seem to have no independence or ability to threaten the Iranains.
On the scale of inlfuenctial nations, where the UK rank? Well below Iran for starters...
So we turned our back on the Commonwealth, Europe has effectively turned its back on the UK. The UK/USA is like a frightened battered wife relationship - the USA can treat as it wishes as it knows we will never do anything about it and they are arrognantly confident that we will always be "by their side" and they do nothing to help us when we need it.
Thank goodness you have sorted that then.Perhaps you could list those good countries which you would allow to have nukes,list those bad countries which you would not allow to have nukes,list countries which you will consider allowing to have nukes if they ask you nicely.What steps would you take if one of the countries you had decreed should be nuke free had been found to have nukes,nuke the crap out of them perhaps we have the nukes thanks be to folk like you.
Little Black Sambo said...
Hello we met over at Guidos' a couple of days ago,I said in a reply to one of your moronic postings that I found your blog name and you to be offensive,I still do you bigot.
Try a bit harder Iain, it looks like your neo-con barmy army aren't coming out to play tonight.
Perhaps they've all got fed up with being keyboard warriors and have gone to sign up?
On the other hand perhaps not.
I agree with the comments here about Britain's weakness, effectively the UK is now quite unable to defend its own soldiers when taken hostage by another power in the Gulf and Iran is having a propaganda field day. One really does have to question if it is responsible now for the British to continue to deploy troops in the region. Our soldiers deserve better than this pathetic surrender. By now I suspect if it had been US soldiers Tehran would be enjoying some "shock and awe" and Ahmedinajad would be crouching in a bomb shelter. Note the utterly pathetic reaction of most of our parliamentarians as well. At the height of this crisis, Parliament was obsessing over - the casino issue. The current cabinet, British government system and official ministry of defence are not fit to be deploying armies overseas. My guess is that the British Army soldier will now be convinced that their own government are pathetic, incompetent, weak, surrender monkeys.
Try posting something on Nick Robinsons blog.You are told to say it all over again to prevent malicious postings!!
Clever and a good way of getting rid of negative comments.
And as for his comments? Spin nick, pure spin.
No kidding, Iain. The question is, what are you (or the boy Dave) going to do about it? Go to the UN?
Don't make me laugh.
Mike, are you still trolling round here? Get a life, even your sock puppets the so-called pensioners seem to have deserted you.
Anonymous said...7:52 PM By now I suspect if it had been US soldiers Tehran would be enjoying some "shock and awe" and Ahmedinajad would be crouching in a bomb shelter.
If I had posted such a cretinous comment I would also be anonymous ,a few too many war films daft lad.
ed ballsdick said...Mike, are you still trolling round here?
Hello "ed" the rest of the gang are back in the home, I am now all on my own and certainly no match for the likes of you.
No ifs, no buts. Never.
But the UK is not willing to go to war so I bet Iran will get nukes. Re. the Iran piracy incident according to Mark Steyn in the Corner:
"7% favour preparing for military action at this stage
26% want Britain to apologise and ask for the captives back
40% back the government’s position of continued diplomatic action stopping short of an apology"
kris said...
No kidding, Iain. The question is, what are you (or the boy Dave) going to do about it?
We are going to blog my friend that's what we are going to do.
Why shouldn't Iran have nukes?
It has never attacked another country, which is something the nuclear-armed USA, Britain and particularly Israel cannot claim.
Iranians died in their thousands fighting against Saddam Hussein.
Whay are you so anti-Iranian, Iain?
“these people”
This sounds more Kilroy Silk than Iain Dale. No, whatever happens, we don’t want those scummy Iranians getting hold of a technology which is rightfully ours alone.
Some of the comments on this thread are a joke. I am not being anti Iranian, I am being anti the Iranian government. They're a bunch of lunatics. If you seriously would be happy for them to have nuclear weapons then you're as much of a lunatic as Ahmandinijad.
Anonymous writes
Yes I agree. Nuclear weapons must never be in the hands of countries who have no respect for international norms, or international law.
I presume they mean Israel or the US?
Iain Dale said...Some of the comments on this thread are a joke. I am not being anti Iranian, I am being anti the Iranian government.
Thread title "Iran to Have Nukes? No Thanks"
So when they get a government of which you approve they may have the nukes ?
Is it fair to assume that the entire population of Iran is 100% behind President Ahmandinijad and the few "rent-a-nutter" types who demonstrated outside the British Embassy in Tehran this weekend?
(Consider what percentage of UK adults voted for Tony Blair at the last election and you can see how easy it is for unpopular politicians to cling on to power.)
From what I read, it is only a matter of time before Ahmandinijad is thrown out of power by his own people.
Until that happy day, "jaw jaw will always be better than war war."
Iain Dale said...
....If you seriously would be happy for them to have nuclear weapons then you're as much of a lunatic as Ahmandinijad.
Iain
Perhaps you haven't realised it yet but Blair's a lunatic, Brown's an even bigger lunatic and Bush is the biggest lunatic of the lot.
mike said...
ed ballsdick said...Mike, are you still trolling round here?
Hello "ed" the rest of the gang are back in the home, I am now all on my own and certainly no match for the likes of you.
When are you going into the home Mike?
help the aged said...When are you going into the home Mike?
They won't allow me back until I have finished the anger management course,the morons.
With all due respect Iain, what a load of bullocks!
You may recall I asked about this during one of your shows, your commentators gave a fairly generic answer basically saying "we're a better country with a stronger value system than the ragheads".
I quite frankly disagree.
If they want nukes, none of our business, just as its not their business if we have them.
One rule for 'us' and one for 'them' eh?
OK, here's something we can probably all agree on.
We offer to swap Tony Blair for the hostages. We can't say fairer than that. OK, we'll throw in Fat Cherie for ballast and that's our final offer.
Delivery charges to be met by us.
I totally agree, the Iranian regime must not be allowed nuclear weapons.
Of course, there is only one way to prevent them, and it ain't diplomacy.
Clearly some of these idiots have no idea how grave a threat iran is.
The government is a bunch of islamo nazis who are leading their country on a path toward disaster.
It's times like these I thank god for america.
Verity,
You're on the right track, but we have to be prepared to negotiate harder...
The Iranians have to take Brown, Straw, Milliband, Blunkett (with all his un-sold books) Clarke, Reid, Beckett and Blears - or it's no deal.
If they get tough, we can always throw in "Mike" to show good will.
We should also insist that they take Prescott, although they might point out that Iran is mountainous enough as it is.
Anyone who does NOT believe that we are a better country than Iran with a better value system than them, should quite frankly p-off and join them, as I fail to see how such people are "adding value" to this country in any way.
verity - that's the first sensible thing you've said all year !
"One rule for 'us' and one for 'them' eh?"
This is the thinking left's modern equivalent of "Peace in our time".
Bit like saying we must have a level playing field with the Nazis because otherwise it's not fair. Just shows that there will always be dickheads in every generation........
verity said...
OK, here's something we can probably all agree on...........
Yes that's for you to give us all a break and stop posting for a year or two.
professor hemlock said...You're on the right track, but we have to be prepared to negotiate harder...
If they get tough, we can always throw in "Mike" to show good will.
Unlike the boring beyond belief verity you appear to have a sense of humour,you are a very funny man,you make me laugh.
Anonymous said...
Clearly some of these idiots have no idea how grave a threat iran is.
Thankfully we have an idiot like you who does.
Tom Tyler said...I totally agree, the Iranian regime must not be allowed nuclear weapons.Of course, there is only one way to prevent them, and it ain't diplomacy.
What is it then Tom do tell, nothing I like more than a silly twerp like you giving us all the benefit of your long experience as a blogger.
Why, Mike, I am more than glad to tell you.
The solution is, as I said, not diplomacy, but to cower, grovel, snivel and apologise unreservedly to Iran for even existing. And to get Coldplay to write a nice song about Iran. Yeah! That way, they will see that we are very nice people, not like BushaliburtonChimpHitler and all those nasty evil men who do naughty things like war and stuff. I'll be on acoustic guitar, you can sing and be on bongos. That will show them who has the moral high ground, oh yes.
I've always been in the "Let them have them" camp on Iran and Nukes, I disagree fundamentally with the way we dictate what people should do like we have some right to do so. However, this past week has shown that Iran has dangerous intent towards the UK, it's pushing it, it's playing hardball even before they have nukes, humiliating the UK. Therefore it is in interests of our national security that they don't get them. This is not Iraq, Iraq wasn't attacking us, Sadaam wasn't even indulging in rhetoric any more, he was whimpering and trying desperately to prove to the UN that he had no WMD. Iran on the other hand are ramping up the Rhetoric and seizing our soldiers. They're a clear danger therefore it's common sense for us to do what we can to stop them having Nuclear capability.
Luckily while we may sit by idly, I can't see Israel letting Iran get Nukes without some major strategic strikes to try to stop them, and as long as it ain't bombing civilians I'm right behind them on it.
anon 7:08pm
"The Iranians know that there will be no vote to use force against Iran"
Absolutely, bang on target! - the Iranians have timed this one quite carefully - Bush n' Blair on the way out, being replaced by Democrats (US) and lefties (NuLab) - ageing kids (Hillary n' Brown) who are both pro-motherhood/apple pie/1960s/70s Chou En Lai non-aligned peace-loving peoples /hippy Coca Cola Internationale lotsatax - but none of it for armed defence.
A weak and majority anti-US/UK UN led by another weak tax-paid 'anti-colonialist'. An EU led by Germany n' France (both with juicy trade deals with Iran they won't have threatened), Iraq fatigue throughout the west (incl. UK/US/Aus voters).
Defence spending at an all-time low. Maritime law something your grandad told you about, like the Beatles' new LP.
So it's 'Hey Iran, come in and make yourselves at home' time, innit?
Unless.
Unless we decide we need more conventional protection against Iran to prevent WWIII breaking out with a nuclear strike. We could rebuild the Navy, and re-equip the Army.
Oh no, surely not, why would we need to spend money on that? Maternity leave, equal pay, more lawyers, more local lesbian facilities in Camden, that's what we need.
You decide, people of the UK.
Freedom, or Slavery. And no, it hasn't been abolished yet. Not for you.
professor hemlock - by goodness I think the boy's cracked it ! that mountain of unsold Blunkett memoirs !
We just have to get the HMS Coventry to ship out the millions of copies to plug up the Shatt-al-Arab. Flooding the entire delta area and making the arguments over what is international water a lot less pressing for Iran than wondering how they are going to stop their country from disappearing under the sea...
Anon 7.08.
Good sense from beginning to end. Unfortunately the whole country is being handed over to people like "Mike".
Sarcasm alert)
Blimey, all these posts and only one reference to Israel and nuclear weapons.
Quite quiet bearing in mind it's Passover.
Iain, the Iranian government are not "a bunch of lunatics. They are extremely rational political actors.
They live in a "tough neighbourhood", they have US troops or allies on almost every border, plus Israel is nuclear armed (I am not criticising Israel per se).
The Iranian government has seen what works from the North Korea situation - brinkmanship. They are also not a monolith. Some elements say things for domestic consumption, just like in other countries.
Whatever other job you get in a future Conservative government, I fervently hope it's nowhere near the FCO or Defence!
Little Black Sambo said...
Anon 7.08.Good sense from beginning to end. Unfortunately the whole country is being handed over to people like "Mike".
Who is handing the country over to people like me you nincompoop ?
Tom Tyler said...
Why, Mike, I am more than glad to tell you.
You rambled on but gave no coherent answer what would you do, would you go to war,nuke them what,just tell me without being silly what would you do Tom ?
Yes, I am talking about going to war against Iran, and using whatever weapons it may take (including nukes if need be) to destroy their nuclear programme.
Grow up, mate. John Lennon's "Imagine" is for nursery school.
Wow! have you got an ego Mike.
You've got to be a lecturer?
I claim my £5
Tom Tyler said...
Yes, I am talking about going to war against Iran, and using whatever weapons it may take (including nukes if need be) to destroy their nuclear programme.
How many dead would be acceptable to achieve your aim and what other countries with nuclear ambitions would you take out next ?
Difficult to say, Mike.
Certainly 7.1 million at least (as judging from Ahmadinejad's statements, that would seem to be the cost of allowing Iran to obtain nukes, as measured in Israeli lives).
Where else? Certainly any country whose name ends in "-stan" that seeks nukes is a priority for preventative action.
Tom Tyler said...
Difficult to say, Mike.
Certainly 7.1 million at least (as judging from Ahmadinejad's statements, that would seem to be the cost of allowing Iran to obtain nukes, as measured in Israeli lives).
Where else? Certainly any country whose name ends in "-stan" that seeks nukes is a priority for preventative action.
Silly reply from a silly person.
Let's hope that they haven't developed them already huh?
They don't want them, anyway. Their Supreme Leader has even issued a fatwa against them.
Like the non-existent Iraqi WMD, the non-existent Iranian nuclear weapons programme is just a ruse, a Straussian lie, to annex an oil-rich country to the global hegemony, in this case also, as Yugoslavia was, an emerging multi-ethnic democracy while retaining that independence.
>as I fail to see how such people are "adding value" to this country in any way.
See Tom, its that kind of outlook which make this country the moral vacuum it truly is.
Do try to remember that the citizen is not answerable to the state or other citizens. They have no need to justify themselves or their existence.
On a more personal level, given the circumstances, I would happily leaves these shores for good.
Knowing many people who fought in WW2, they didn't fight for this bastardised, self centred, oppressive nation.
The UK has well and truly peaked and is rapidly going downhill in any way you look at it.
I'm looking forward to the rise of India & China, hopefully It might bring some people in this country back to earth.
As for Iran, well, who knows the truth? If the British government are to be believed (and I find no reason to do so), then they should have taken a much firmer approach. As it is, we look weak and unsure of our position.
If Iran are right, then these people should be put on trial, just as I would hope we'd do the same in this country...
...oh, thats right, we actually allow countries such as the US to install their massive surveillance capability on our shores so they can snoop into the citizens and commerce of Europe and Russia.
Perhaps slightly off-message, but those who are able and wish to do something about the hostage crisis in Iran, ‘Free the Navy 15/Hostages’ is a group of like-minded individuals who decided it was about time the Iranian Government saw how outraged the British public are about the kidnapping of our service personnel, and their exploitation as propaganda tools. They have a website at http://freethenavy15.blogspot.com/.
It's their aim to organise regular protests outside the Iranian Embassy in London (16, Prince's Gate, South Kensington, London, SW7 1PT, for those joining them!). These protests aren't affiliated to any political party, or about anything more than getting our sailors and Marines freed.
No matter what your views on the wider situation in the Middle East, I hope you'll join them to campaign against this kidnapping.
The next protest is at 6.45pm today, Wednesday, 4 April 2007.
So Keith, our once great nation which held off and repelled the German Army, Navy and Luftwaffe are now reduced to stamping their feet outside a foreign embassy.
What a sad state of affairs.
The victorious crap coming out of Downing Street is sickening.
We had no clout, no power, no authority and no credibility.
Thank you to both the Tories & Labour for allowing this to happen. All politicians must feel proud of themselves.
Post a Comment