Are Britains enemy your friends??

[Wasp]

Big Big Big differnece between the highly trained, moral, skillful soldiers in the British army than the scum in the ira. British soldiers rik their lives all over the globe to help defend people and to help in rebuilding their lives. Kosovo etc is a fine example.

The ira just went out to kill and usually targeted unarmed people on purpose over and over again. While the British like all civilized armies have made mistakes they took steps to try to prevent these mistakes being repeated with extra care etc taken. Unlike the ira who went about the same business over and over and over again with the same intent everytime knowing what the end result would be.

[Jim]

If you say so Wasp. I'm sure the MRF had halos at the end of the day.

[An Fear Dubh]

Wasp, you really do spew out some shite at times. I often wonder do you ever stop to think before you let rip? Most British Army soldiers are naive young working class men and women who had little employment prospects. Various reports from Iraq have shown that lessons that should have been learnt from the north, have not been learnt and the same mistakes are being repeated. And mainly that is because we have young men who do not fully understand the long term implications of certain actions. And those that should be giving them leadership have not done so properly. We are intelligent people, like you can be at times. But you treat us with nothing but contempt and try to insult at every chance. While such insults are like water of a ducks back, I feel you begin to buy into your own bullshit.

But trying to steer away from the insults, let me attempt to bring this back onto the topic, and I will ignore future insults from Wasp in this thread.

I have not been in Iraq (that I know), but I do not really think one needs to be on the ground to recognize some things. I never bought into the WMD and in other sites prior to the invasion I have left posts to that effect. It has in my opinion always been about who controls the oil and its distribution. While American and British troops and their sub elements are a force in Iraq it is impossible to know what the people of Iraq really want. It could be viewed on a par with the north before SF involved themselves in electoral politics we were told regularly there was no support for republicanism. So at the moment there is obviously some sections of the divided society in Iraq that are profiting economically from the occupation. Jobs for the boys etc. So of course these people and their wider family circle will want this to continue.

But to answer the initial question that Harry posed: Are Britain enemy your friends? The quick answer is of course not! Such a response would be ignorant and stupid. Previously when there was a military aspect to republicanism having contacts that might provide some advantage in the future were never spurned. Yes some of those links were morally questionable, but in war you have to suppress some moral question marks. Now things have changed and SF need to be more careful about relationships. I spent a short time in 'Kurdistan' staying with a family, and I am unsure which country I was in, so it could have been Iraq. So I have sympathy for cause of the Kurds but their difficulties are huge. Generally when pushed on various conflicts my response is that my main concern is my own country but I support the right of people to self-determination free from outside interference.

[Blue Angel]

next time i go to see grandads grave in a small village near kilkenny i must remember to tell him he was cowardly scum when i stick some flowers on the grave. I'd better tell the british col. who was resolutely unionist who is buried nearby that his best mate was scum to. Both men been capable of coping with contradictions and paradoxes would be bemused by the accusation. I am getting irked with this - i disagree with unionism but you will find no point where i call all unionists scum or even all members of loyalist organisations- it's absurdly reductionist and would be plain and simple bollox.

I am far, far from romanticising the IRA via some chocolate box image of them as all noble and chivalrous fellows out of a story book. But bloody hell reducing the complexities of reality to 'cowardly scum' is bananas. And as historical point the British army considered using the IRA as a model for tactics in contingency plans for invasion during WW2 and even solicited the advice of ex members in the Irish army.

But movng back on track - Iraq and Iran have both seen puppet leaders installed in the past so naturally suspicions are high there about western involvement. Ever noticed how flipping straight iraq's borders are - look at the carve up of it between various imperial powers after ww1 ....

Weapons of mass destruction - an annoying term - what the f**k does it actually mean really -it's pretty vague and open to a large number of interepretations. I alwas found it an annoying term - when someone says heavy machine gun or mortar or guided misile you know roughly what damage level is meant but WMD was a kind of convenient 'can be altered to suit circumstance's bit of BS

[Jim]

Indeed, its uncalled for. I was never in the IRA but I am a republican and calling me a tyrant is just being a bollocks about it, your better than that Wasp.

I think it was easy for some to be gropped into the WMD issue, the negative portrayal of Saddam in the west would lead people to think hes just out to do evil. I didnt like him either but I could see beyond the "this man is evil you shouldnt like him" lark put out by the BBC and by Blair. Its ironic that the UK and US are laying into Iran, but the reality is its because they wont bow to the pressure. Its nothing to do with freedom or democracy, Bush doesnt give a shit about freedom or democracy, if he did he'd have invaded Burma by now.

[Blue Angel]

ah funny you should mention burma -that's a complex one all in itself - for example Aung San Suu Kyi who is generally regarded as a model of democracy for her protests against the miltary dictatorship there but her father was Burma's equivalent of Michael Collins and allied himself with the Japanese for much of WW2 -until he realised the Japs were stringing him along and would never make good on their promises and went over to the British side in the dying days of the war. The British authorities wanted him at one point for 'terrorist' actions but were quite happy to do business with him when it suited them - just to show how ambigous reality is....

[Shades40]

Britain and the US reduced Afghanistan to rubble, why? maybe we'll see another Jihad such as the one launched agaisnt the Russians with the help of the Americans, interesting times.

[Shades40]

In Zeitgeist it states that the reason Governments allow vast amounts of drugs into their countries is because it helps control the population (ie keeps them entertained), if you look at the current statistics on drug use among young people and the recent growth in use and then look at the increase in heroin production in Afghanistan under the UK/US administration it certainly makes you wonder.

[Harry]

The Taliban towards the end of their reign were attempting to stop the opium trade when they started co-operating with some sort of UN body. It had been going on for years and while their late attempt to curb it shouldn't go un-noticed, they shouldn't be made out to be some sort of anti heroin movement because they weren't. They made their penny worths out of it. No doubt Setanta you are correct that the amount of Opium being harvested now has increased after the invasion and this is something that needs to be addressed and urgently. My point is that if other NATO countries pulled their damn fingers out then this problem could be tackled with much more force.

What would happen in Iraq now if all forces pulled out?? Is that what some of you on here think is best for the Iraqi people?? Of course the legitimacy of us ever being there is a cause of concern even for me but whats done is done and we either try and stablilse the place or we allow it to destroy itself. No good can come from us leaving the place without finishing the job. Actually being on the ground and visiting towns and villages and meeting ordinary Iraqis is an eye opener. The fear they have of these gangs who bomb and kill is unreal, the contol these gangs have is also unbelievable and is making things very difficult for caolition troops. They use civilians to mask their attacks and launch attacks from hospitals,schools etc just like the Taliban do in Afghan. Its a real mess and i wish i had the answer of how we could end it all but i don't.

Is Iran really the sort of country that you would like to see poccess a nuclear weapon?? Israel will stop it long before the US or UK ever got involved. They have the most to fear and listening to that mad leader of Iran it easy to understand where they are coming from. Wiping countries of the map etc etc, should he be allowed to develop the ultimate weapon???

[An Fear Dubh]

While I do not support Iran, I think it is hypocritical of America and others to dictate to them, given their position with other countries. So it does look like it is all about influence and control and not about military capabilities. America had no problems with allowing Israel limited nuclear capabilities and launching facilities. So do not get sucked in again by the propaganda, if America were to adopt foreign policies that did not pick and choose I might look differently.

But trying to leave Iran and Israel aside and just deal with the complex side of Iraq. Saddam was the puppet of the West, and only when he threatened the oil distribution did they decide that he was unjust. So are agreed that the invasion was wrong?

Do you think America and Britain really want to pull out? Or do you believe that because of home opinion they feel compelled to make gestures and false statements saying that the time is not right for a withdrawal? When the reality is that while the oil is under threat there will be no withdrawal? Once you accept that the oil is the main primary issue in all of this you can begin to unravel the problem. While you think that it is about 'freedom', 'democracy' you can not see a solution, because America and others are not setting up a solution that will allow an easy withdrawal. You talk about finishing the job, what job is this? Creating 'democracy'? Finish it what about starting it?

In Iraq they have a few different groupings and they mainly come from 3 distinct sections. Kurds, Sunni and Shia Muslims. The problem is Kurds want their own country, but the traditional 'homelands' is now divided by Turkey, Iran, Russia and Iraq. These are rich in oil fields so that is why after WW2 everyone wanted a slice. Saddam came from the smaller faction (I think Shia) and they dominated the other two by force when political action was not effective or efficient. The current President set up by the US is a Kurd. The PM is a Shia. The Kurds want an Autonomous state, but the Americans need them to maintain control, the Americans also need them sweet to maintain oil distribution in the north which is more secure than distribution in the south.

Without a doubt the situation would be extreme and bloody if the American and British withdrew. And they do need to leave in an designed way. There is no perfect solution but staying as an occupation force is not the way. They need now to set a withdrawal date and work towards that, but their continued presence is not moving things forward but deferring the inevitable. Of course they will not do this because the whole thing resolves around oil distribution. People who believe that they are there bringing 'democracy' are deluding themselves, the facts are there to be read.

[Jim]

Im no more against Iran having nuclear power than any other country. Lets be honest, theres only one country that has ever used a nuclear weapon, the US, and they wiped out two entire cities using them. What makes them any more responsable than Iran?

[bearhunter]

To return to the thread topic, no Britain's enmemies are not my friends. Nor are they the friends of the Irish state. The rhetorical flourish in the thread title harks back 90 years and while that might be the blink of an eye for some here, it isn't in the real world. As for some of the more extreme comments here, WASP, you've clearly not met many soldiers if you think the British Army are "moral". Even their C/Os wouldn't claim that. I know several and I drink regularly with three ex-squaddies and I can tell you they are about as morally upright as a sack of snakes; and quite proud of that fact as well.
As for neutral nations being mealy mouthed cowards who hide behind the skirts of brave Britain and USA forces, Harry I must raise the issue of NZ/Australia here. NZ is a neutral country (our PM told us so not long ago) yet NZ troops are delpoyed in Sinai, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, East Timor and the Solomon Islands. The reason they are so popular is precisely because they are neutral and carry no colonial/neo-colonial baggage. In Aghanistan the engineer regiment is rebuilding bridges, roads and water supplies, a far more useful task than many I could imagine. And they are not just builders as this link proves:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Apiata

[Wasp]

next time i go to see grandads grave in a small village near kilkenny i must remember to tell him he was cowardly scum when i stick some flowers on the grave.

BA first and foremost when I talk about the ira, it is the ira that I grew up with not the ira of 50,60 years ago etc. My opinion of the present day ira has not and will not change (unless a miacle happens) but I was referiing to the modern ira not the old ira if you understand.

Jim on tyranny I am talking about republican links with tyranny.

[Wasp]

As for some of the more extreme comments here, WASP, you've clearly not met many soldiers if you think the British Army are "moral"

;.

I certainly have met and know many soldiers but that is another stroy. Anyway I have never claimed they are perfect, never said they didn't make mistakes etc but when it comes to a role such as in the Balkans etc then there are few who could do it better.

[Jim]

wasp said:

next time i go to see grandads grave in a small village near kilkenny i must remember to tell him he was cowardly scum when i stick some flowers on the grave.

BA first and foremost when I talk about the ira, it is the ira that I grew up with not the ira of 50,60 years ago etc. My opinion of the present day ira has not and will not change (unless a miacle happens) but I was referiing to the modern ira not the old ira if you understand.

Jim on tyranny I am talking about republican links with tyranny.

We have no links with tyranny.

By links you imply we support and back up tyrants and dictators, no, we dont.