Protest Nonsense and Kurds

DM

The pavement dwelling middle classes, fed by Cinnamon Muesli and boasted by green tea, have been out on the town again.  Rather than confront the Chinese embassy over their building of coal fired power stations, or indeed the Indian Commission asking them to stop kicking Muslims in Kashmir around for a while and cease the pollution the nation is churning out, these well dressed protestors (What is their apparel made from?) instead block the streets.
Having removed the plastic straws from their homes, but retained the TV's, Stereos, mobile phones and the containers they use at picnics and equestrian gatherings, they have decided to squat on the pavement, hindering real people from movement, and added millions to the police costs which make it harder to police the end the knife crime haunting the nation at the moment they pose happily for the media scramble persuaded this waste of time is not a waste of time. 
Indeed no change will come of this.  Brexit is all and politics is not about planet saving.  Deciding to have a 'jolly' while Boris is trying to save himself not the planet is rank bad timing.  There is no chance anyone in No 10 will have noticed this demonstration of adult stupidity and callousness, it may be they reckon this has come over from the EU to cause trouble, but will ignore it anyway.
You do not see people such s these protesting about 'Universal Credit,' the Homeless or the number of Food Banks in the nation.  They rarely leave home, bar to shop for 'must have' items found in colour supplements or visit a coffee shop or wine bar to discuss the worlds problems, especially the possible loss of the 'John Lewis' shop.  Possibly there is a reason for this small minded outlook?   
A people with no God look for a purpose, anything will do as long as it does not cost!  Each year these people chase one cause after another, anti-hunting this year save the whales the next.  Fixing real problems take time, take a great deal of work, cost money and often friends also.  Sitting on the street with aged unbalanced Hippies does not cost and you can go back smug in the knowledge you have made your protest to save the planet, even though it will have no real effect.
Enjoy your Hummus, Focaccia, Black Olives and Pheasant Eggs tonight...

 USA Today

The nature of the US President is revealed clearly in the report today that he is abandoning the Kurds who removed ISIS from Iraq, with little help, and removing his troops from the region to allow Turkey, under the dictator Erdogon, to move in with massive force to annihilate as many as he can.
What sort of man does this, indeed, what sort of man does this publicly and even boasts about his deed?  
Why is he doing this?
Turkey is a member of Nato and borders the unsafe Russia.  However Putin and Trump go back a long way, who knows what is going on between those two, yet as he backed Syria Putin might like to look good backing the Kurds.  Trumps daughter has money in Turkish businesses and that may play a part.  Something more is involved here, this will get out of hand, nothing in the Middle East is simple.

Here We Go Again!

One of the ideas that entered David Cameron's head some time ago was the one that said a successful Prime Minister was a strong 'war leader.'  He has been looking for his war in order to show himself strong ever since.  We have seen him act in Libya, pushing Obama into an action he attempted to avoid and we now see that country divided amongst several groups, none of whom we intended to allow such freedom.  He wished to intervene in Syria but was put off by Obama and his own defence people.  For some undeclared reason he avoided intervening in the Ukraine difficulty except by mouthing words against Putin and offering solace but nothing else to Kiev. Cynic I may be but the billions of Russian money, taken from the people in a style admired by the Conservative Party of which Cameron is the head, could possibly have influenced him.  The Russian's having all that gas amongst other things we need certainly coloured his thoughts. Cameron will not have noticed any conflict in Africa, or indeed any other poor nation with no oil or other item we require, but he will possibly send them a Christmas Card, if he remembers.

We are about to involve ourselves against this weeks bad guys, ISIS, or whatever the name is this week.  We do this party for humanitarian reasons and we are told, and Scots recognise how the media is used for propaganda purposes, we do this because ISIS are a danger to us and need to be dealt with. Therefore the RAF will join in with bombing whatever the targets provided happen to be.  

Now the interesting thing here is the participation of both Saudi Arabia and Qatar (both Sunni) the very people who provided weapons and cash to encourage the Sunni rebels to break up Syria (Mostly Shia) and yet now joined in this bombing!  Other Arab states such as Jordan are indeed unhappy and willing participants but Saudi and Qatar, really?  Call me a cynic but.....

"No boots on the ground," is the cry.  Our soldiers, or what is left of them after the stringent cuts, will not be 'on the ground in Iraq.'  We know the SAS types are there, this is where they show their worth, but with little understanding of what will happen tomorrow can Cameron really believe that troops will never be put into Iraq?  I doubt it as I do not expect any Arab or Iranian force to be capable of dealing with ISIS face to face.  The Iraqi's ran away last time!  

Once again we enter the unknown, watch this space.

  

Once a week, if the timetable permits, according to the unwritten (and better) 'British (that means English) constitution the Prime Minister meets with the monarch and discusses affairs of state.  This may be a long or short meeting depending on the importance of the issues and whether the monarch is in a hurry to go to watch her horses racing at Newmarket.  Now these meetings are always confidential, no PM has ever uttered a word concerning the exchanges as far as we know.  This when the meetings have not always been enjoyable. Disraeli flattered Queen Victoria and was popular with her but even he ion occasions wished to strangle the stubborn woman (stubborn woman? Surely not?).  She disliked Gladstone who addressed her, she said, like she was a public meeting, and he was around a long time! In recent years no PM has gone beyond cautious courtesy when referring to meetings with the monarch but recently blabbermouth Cameron could not resist boring some foreign leader with his victory over the Scots, a victory achieved by cheating, lying and the aid of the media.  'The queen was, he said, 'purring' at the news.  Well she would be as she owns half off it!  He could have asked her to send donations to the many foodbanks by Barmoral!  However, the point is he discussed the discussion with the monarch, this is a bad thing to do and this idiot PM gave no thought to the cameras, microphones or the devious nature of the two faced media who instantly blasted this story to the world.  Now the PM has to go cap in hand and apologise to her for his blemish.  One hopes she will indicate her opinion properly, possibly by allowing Prince Philip to get his gun out! If a premier cannot be trusted with such a small thing can he be trusted with military action?

  

Confusion?

Not that long ago Winston Churchill, he of the champagne breakfasts and half smoked cigars, talked of the 'special relationship' between the 'English speaking peoples.'  What he meant of course was Britain and America, and Churchill's mother was American and he had indeed a special relationship with the country. Since then many British Prime Ministers, and loud newspapers, have kept this 'special relationship' in the public eye.  Whether Churchill really believed it I know not, no other PM believed it!  However what they did recognise was the two nations have a lot in common, not language as we know they cannot speak it properly, but basic understandings of life, who the good guys are and what should be done about things.  Today both intelligence services work together in many ways, mostly listening in to you and I as we phone our family, scribble a blog and send emails.  These poor men must be helluva bored that's all I can say!  
However it was quickly learnt in Britain that the USA under Harry Trueman did not appreciate this 'special relationship,' as they hopped it back to after the war, ignoring the Soviet takeover off half of Europe and ignoring the threat to the rest.  I think it may be down to Churchill's speech off an 'Iron Curtain,' cutting Europe in half that allowed General Marshall to produce his 'Marshall Plan' to rebuild Europe.  Marshall was not a great warrior General but he was a wise diplomatic one and understood that not only was Stalin a threat but the US could not export to a dead Europe.  The dead Europe would have seen some nations tempted to Communism and US cash, well spent, would aid the USA also.  And so it was, and I admit I generalise freely here.

Come George W Bush and his needless invasion of Iraq we find the UK government led by an admirer of all things American, Tony Blair.  Bush, and especially those strange men behind the scene, were motivated not just for oil, if indeed that was the reason, but because Israel wished Saddam out of the way.  They feared his threat, real or imaginary, to their state and the compliant people who actually run the States followed on.  Tony Blair spoke of the 'special relationship' which he knew meant 'follow the US at all times or they might turn against you' and he did not wish to spoil that relationship.  A more courageous leader might well have done so with no break in the 'relationship' for Harold Wilson, then the Labour PM, refused to send even a military band to Vietnam when urged to do so by Lyndon Johnson.  Certainly that would have produced problems at home but in the end we still borrowed cash from America, amongst others, and life continued.  
This morning we read of David Cameron who, I kid you not, is actually Prime Minister of the United Kingdom!  Indeed you rub your eyes but it is true, he is the PM, the most important man after which ever singer/filmstar/footballer has committed suicide/got married/found with drugs. Incredible as it seems he is once again following on the one lesson he learned during the Blair years, you get votes if you prove you are a tough war leader!  He forgets Iraq is Blair's legacy, one he cannot ever evade.  
Our bright, keen 'Dear Leader,' has already urged Obama in action in Lybia where the nasty Gaddafi was removed and the people set free to kill one another while gangs of gunmen roam around for political/religious/banditry reasons.  His next move was more intricate, he wanted to join the war on Assad in Syria.  Now Saudi Arabia(our friends who buy our guns etc, Sunni Muslims who produce bin Laden) and Qatar ( our friends who buy our guns etc to keep their population under control, Sunni Muslim rulers of a Shia state) both supplied arms (bought from UK, US, France etc) to the Sunni's fighting against Assad.  Both states are afraid of Iran (Shia state that is not sold anything by anyone bar North Korea and those who don't admit selling stuff) so get at Iran by breaking up the stable state that was Syria.  Obviously the west allowed this to occur as nothing was done to stop it.  Obama rightly may not wish to be involved in the Middle East but the US must have allowed this to happen.  The proof is Cameron's desire to join in. Now we see the 'rebels' are dominated by Sunni 'extremists,' armed by our friends in the Middle East now taking over the northern parts of Iraq which as we all know are Sunni dominated.  The southern part of Iraq, Shia dominated and badly led, now finds its capital under threat from the 'rebels' who not only are Islamic extremists they are so violent they claim al Quaida (spell it your way) have distanced themselves from them!  The threat to the Kurds is real enough and the ISIS mob, or is it Islamic State mob I don't know, have better weapons than the Kurds (who may be Shia or Sunni I know not but are Kurds first when this lot are about) so Cameron is talking not just about arming the Kurds but taking military action against this 'real danger' to the UK.

So what this means is the people supported by our 'friends' are now our enemies but the arms they posses were given by our friends when they were also our friends but are not friends any more but our friends who armed them are not opposing them in northern Iraq but we are, and while opposing our friends friends we take help from our friends enemy who is our enemy except when aiding us against our enemy who once was our friend but isn't any more but remains friends of our friends just the same while our friends enemy is no longer our enemy but our friend.
Simple really.
What it comes down to is another PR stunt by the slimy Cameron telling us that Obama, against his wishes, has to aid the Kurds, we support him in this and use air power, something our friends friend who is our enemy does not posses, to attack his heavy weapons and drop aid to the folks he is killing for no reason. We will also supply heavier weapons (who pays Cameron?), SAS troops on the ground, although they may already be there, and according to this mouthpiece troops will soon follow.  
Cameron is following the 'special relationship' much loved by the Conservative Party, even though it is one sided, and it may well be attempting to drag Obama rather than follow.  
By all means stand by our friends, and the US are 'friends.'  By all means oppose tyranny everywhere and at all times.  The one thing missing is long term consideration of what is going on in the middle East.  This problem grew out of the aftermath of the Great War when Britain and France carved up the middle East between themselves taking no account of religious differences. Ignoring the people we find that after Saddam the place was left, under Israeli instruction, to fall apart.  What has happened has brought a greater danger, to Israel and the wider world!  Folly at all levels has allowed the situation to explode and the politicians in the west are struggling to cope.  In the meantime many die.

Cameron stayed very quiet while Israel bombed Gaza, merely stating they had a right to defend themselves, he was very reluctant to leave his holiday in Portugal while the Yazidi's were being forced out of their homes, he has only now surfaced to play the war leader.  He has certainly never mentioned the many types of Christian who has suffered in the Middle East, especially under ISIS, where death for thousands has occurred.  He cannot mention them as he is afraid of the Muslims at home.  A bit late for that Prime Minister!  He is also afraid of the gay lobby and the secularists who he is desperate to run after.  
This man is not a leader, he merely runs after whatever grabs the headline and reaches for a vote. The 'special relationship' will be used here as a reason to follow the US, 'for our own protection,' while a wider vision of what is actually happening will be seen as unnecessary. 
.

Have I Got This Right?

Independent

So the Assad regime in Syria is bad, they say, even though the state is stable. His friends are Russia and Iran, a Shia state is Assad's best supporter.  We therefore support the rebels, mostly Sunni, who oppose him and are now dominated by Sunni extremists supplied by Sunni led Qatar and Sunni dominated Saudi Arabia.  We therefore are supporting the bin Laden so today who wish to attack and destroy us......
The Sunni led extremist group ISIS now dominates the Sunni areas that once supported Saddam Hussein.  He was a bad one and Bush and Blair dumped him. We now therefore support the Iran, our enemy, backed Shia in Iraq, our friend, against the Sunni, our enemy, in Iraq who are our friends in Syria because we need the Saudi, our friend, oil and we support them attacking Syria to destabilise Iran, our enemy, who support our friends in Iraq. I've not yet mentioned the Kurds....   

Did I understand this right or is all this late night football wearing out what remains of my little mind.....?

.