The Usual Warmongers 71

To many of us who have been in conflict zones without a sanitised cordon around us, and actually seen the effects close-up (and that excludes almost all of the political class), it is astonishing that the neo-cons constantly seek to promote war, any war. They just cannot sit comfortably unless we are blowing somebody, somewhere, limb from limb.

Little Aylan Kurdi and his family were fleeing Kobani, a town the US Air Force have been bombing relentlessly for weeks. Bombs are entirely agnostic over who they kill, and have not made life notably better for the population.

Yet the news media are now insistently beating the drum for British bombing in Syria. Who should be bombed exactly – ISIL or Assad – appears unimportant, so long as there is bombing. Indeed, the Murdoch Sky News, the Mail and the Blairites are contriving to build a narrative that Jeremy Corbyn, the SNP and bleeding hearts like myself are responsible for the death of little Aylan and hundreds like him, by unreasonable and inhuman opposition to a bit more bombing.

It is very reminiscent of the entirely fake narrative of a (non-existent) tank column sweeping down to massacre every civilian in Benghazi, to halt which we had to murder, by bombing, many thousands of civilians in Sirte, several hundred miles away and containing no tank columns. The people of Benghazi went on to show their gratitude by killing the US Ambassador, while Libya disintegrated into a violent mess with no effective government that could control activities like drug and people smuggling.

That worked well, didn’t it? Of course we should try something similar in Syria.

ISIL is a bastard child of the Iraq War. A bastard child of Bush and Blair. Its weapons are almost entirely American. Some have been captured from Iraqi forces, others were gifted to it by the Saudi/CIA sponsors of its original constituent parts. The countless deaths of children we inflicted by bombing in the Iraq war will fuel it for another two generations.

Never mind old bean. Nothing a spot more bombing won’t sort out, eh?

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

71 thoughts on “The Usual Warmongers

1 2 3
  • John Spencer-Davis

    Old Mark
    07/09/2015 5:40pm

    Previous generations are in the grave. It doesn’t matter two hoots to my grandparents if the UK is obliterated tomorrow.

    Kind regards,


  • Suhayl Saadi

    “Indeed, the Murdoch Sky News, the Mail and the Blairites are contriving to build a narrative that Jeremy Corbyn, the SNP and bleeding hearts like myself are responsible for the death of little Aylan and hundreds like him, by unreasonable and inhuman opposition to a bit more bombing.” Craig.

    Absolutely, Craig. I was viciously (verbally, of course) attacked on social media by a relatively well-known public figure (who is granted much air-time and print space on the subject and other subjects) when I opposed attacking Syria during the Parliamentary debate after the chemical weapons’ use a couple of years ago. It was inferred by this person – a person who, right from the start has been pushing for the US/UK to attack Syria – that for opposing the destruction of Syria and for reminding people of the war crime on Iraq and the yet more lies and breaches of international law and the UN agreement in pursuance of the destruction of Libya, I must be an agent of the Baathist regime and so on.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Are some of these wannabee Lawrence of Arabia-type people in the media working on behalf of the SIS, d’you think? I mean, are they paid agents on a salary, or just agents of influence who can be relied upon to beat the correct drum with the appropriate rhythm? Perhaps there are both. Yes, if I were the spymaster, I’d have as many feet in as many camps as possible. I’d be a centipede.

  • Kempe

    ” This isn’t correct. ”

    Of course it isn’t correct, it’s like Craig’s claim that tens of thousands were killed by NATO bombing in Sirte. Not only is Sirte 214 miles by road from Benghazi but the battles for the two cities occurred months apart. A loyalist tank column DID try and re-take Benghazi between the 19th and 20th March 2011, an attack that was repelled by rebel fighters with assistance from NATO jets which destroyed half the 14 tanks lost. The battle for Sirte didn’t commence until 15th September of that year and lasted until 20th October.

    Most of the NATO sorties were carried out by french aircraft so why wasn’t it their ambassador who got lynched?

  • Kempe

    Oh and ISIS/ISIL/Daesh whatever you want to call them have been trying to fight their way into Kobani for year now but of course they haven’t killed or terrorised anyone.

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Suhayl Saadi
    07/09/2015 6:44pm

    I trust that George Carey is beginning to realize what kind of legacy he has now carved out for himself.

    “The Archbishop of Canterbury who called for bombing a country” is how he will go down in history.

    No doubt he will sleep soundly at night, however.

    Kind regards,


  • Jemand

    “Who should be bombed exactly – ISIL or Assad – appears unimportant, so long as there is bombing.”

    No. To bring Syria into a sufficiently bad state of affairs that cries out for a humanitarian invasion by NATO requires it to be pummeled in a balanced exchange of internecine brutality. Therefore, bombing whichever side that gains the upperhand during the conflict serves to rebalance the war to ensure its continuation until the country collapses for a subsequent invasion. Russia can only provide support to Assad while it has a means of transporting weapons and those transport channels will be frustrated and eventually closed in the lead up to the NATO operation.

  • Bryan Hemming

    As I wrote on my blog the day an editorial in the Independent of July 25th praised Turkey’s decision to join the US’s bombing of Syria:

    “… why go to all the bother of bombing Muslims if you can get them to do it themselves?”

    The rest of the piece can be read here:

    Within two days, without admitting – or even seeing – what had happened, the Independent published the real reasons for Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s eagerness to join the bombing with a report on the first raid on Kurdish forces, the same ground forces that have been most successful in fighting ISIL. Within a couple of hours I posted this on my blog:

    “Within 48 hours of Turkey’s decision to join the bombing of Isis in Syria, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, president of Turkey, revealed the breathtakingly cynical reasoning behind the move, when he sent planes into Northern Iraq to bomb the Kurds.”

    The rest is here:

    The Guardian managed to catch up with events shortly afterwards, whereas it took the Independent another week or so to work out what had really happened. But they conveniently forgot about the editorial. Luckily for the authors, I’m able to refresh their memories. I took a screenshot and also posted that on my blog.

  • Alan Brooke

    It is wrong to suggest that Aylan Kurdi’s family were fleeing US bombing. The bombing of Kobane ,which ceased long since anyway, was carried out in liaison with the defenders of Kobane who regarded the air support as crucial to their victory.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.