Iran

[Spindle]

How has that been going over the last couple of decades?

400 people vapourised in a war that started weeks before the one you are posting on. Not a word.

 

[McAhuna]

I hadn't realised that the Israeli civil war in Gaza was affecting us so badly. Can you explain how? Only it was on constant repeat

One is a war on the edge of the Mediterranean, involving the RAF, which has escalated - initially seeing Iran and Yemen becoming involved, and now another 12 countries have been attacked.

The other is a war in the Hindu Kush mountains which no-one has heard of, between two countries no-one supports, that has no wider global implications.

Also, this thread is about Iran, one of the countries involved in the first war. If you care so much about the Afghan/Pakistan War, why not start a separate thread about it?

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

One is a war on the edge of the Mediterranean, involving the RAF, which has escalated - initially seeing Iran and Yemen becoming involved, and now another 12 countries have been attacked.

The other is a war in the Hindu Kush mountains which no-one has heard of, between two countries no-one supports, that has no wider global implications.

Also, this thread is about Iran, one of the countries involved in the first war. If you care so much about the Afghan/Pakistan War, why not start a separate thread about it?

So despite all your hand wringing, it's not really people's lives you are bothered about.

Oh dear. Your saintly image has taken a knock.

Afghanistan is right next to Iran. You did know that?

 

[McAhuna]

So despite all your hand wringing, it's not really people's lives you are bothered about.

Oh dear. Your saintly image has taken a knock.

Afghanistan is right next to Iran. You did know that?

That's not what I said, though, is it?
I said I can understand one war getting much more media attention in the UK.

I'll say it again. If the Afghan/Pakistan war is of interest you, why not start a separate thread about it?
Then you don't need to clog this one up with your whatabouterry.

For the record, the Pakistan border is twice as far from us as Gaza and Cyprus.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

400 people vapourised in a war that started weeks before the one you are posting on. Not a word.

View attachment 3112

You seem to be under some weird illusion that I'm obliged to post or comment on every attack or atrocity which takes place around the globe. I barely even post on Israeli atrocities these days.

If you want to pretend you can't understand why we as a nation are more complicit in, and therefore concerned with, the atrocities committed by Israel, compared with the likes of Iran or Afghanistan, then that is entirely your prerogative, but please don't keep boring everyone else with it.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

That's not what I said, though, is it?
I said I can understand one war getting much more media attention in the UK.

I'll say it again. If the Afghan/Pakistan war is of interest you, why not start a separate thread about it?
Then you don't need to clog this one up with your whatabouterry.

For the record, the Pakistan border is twice as far from us as Gaza and Cyprus.

OK so you aren't bothered about people dying unless it has some direct connection to Britain. Fair enough.

 

[cryrst]

You seem to be under some weird illusion that I'm obliged to post or comment on every attack or atrocity which takes place around the globe. I barely even post on Israeli atrocities these days.

If you want to pretend you can't understand why we as a nation are more complicit in, and therefore concerned with, the atrocities committed by Israel, compared with the likes of Iran or Afghanistan, then that is entirely your prerogative, but please don't keep boring everyone else with it.

Ok so this wasn’t an atrocity as it wasn’t Israel.
I see now what bias is in real life 🤦

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Ok so this wasn’t an atrocity as it wasn’t Israel.
I see now what bias is in real life 🤦

Presumably you mean reading a post and then summarising it as something completely different, as you have here.

 

[cryrst]

Presumably you mean reading a post and then summarising it as something completely different, as you have here.

I’m sure yours said Israeli atrocities.
In a post including the bombing in Afghanistan. Maybe I saw words that were not there. Let me check….
Nope you put both in one post !

 

[ASCPFC]

OK so you aren't bothered about people dying unless it has some direct connection to Britain. Fair enough.

Pakistan and Afghanistan have direct connections to the UK. It's probably where most of their refugees /migrants are for a starter. Presumably, it will start to play out on the streets soon enough.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Pakistan and Afghanistan have direct connections to the UK. It's probably where most of their refugees /migrants are for a starter. Presumably, it will start to play out on the streets soon enough.

Absolutely.

To me, the resistance to the Iran war is political. Some people just don't ever want war, which is a noble ideal, but for many, it's about Trump. Trump bad. Trump corrupt. Trump right wing.

People are prepared to tolerate a regime like Iran, risk the possibility of them getting nukes and see them fund and promote terrorism while snubbing our greatest ally, simply through political tribalism.

European left wing politicians have an agenda that is not about the people but about clinging on to power at all costs. They are prepared to jeopardize the future of Europe and its people to that end.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Absolutely.

To me, the resistance to the Iran war is political. Some people just don't ever want war, which is a noble ideal, but for many, it's about Trump. Trump bad. Trump corrupt. Trump right wing.

People are prepared to tolerate a regime like Iran, risk the possibility of them getting nukes and see them fund and promote terrorism while snubbing our greatest ally, simply through political tribalism.

European left wing politicians have an agenda that is not about the people but about clinging on to power at all costs. They are prepared to jeopardize the future of Europe and its people to that end.

The polling on support for this 'war' doesn't remotely support your theory - across our political spectrum, the majority of people don't support the war and don't want us involved (70% of voters oppose UK involvement, only 17% support it).

Even anecdotally on here, there doesn't seem to be much correlation between support for Trump and support for this war - plenty on here seem to support Trump but not the war.

 

[McAhuna]

OK so you aren't bothered about people dying unless it has some direct connection to Britain. Fair enough.

Jeez.
It's not a question of not being bothered.
It's a question of whether we can do anything about it, is our tax money funding it, and are we in any way complicit.
If the answers to those questions are 'yes, yes and yes', then people are understandably going to start kicking up more of a fuss than if the answers are 'no, no and no'.
Its obvious really.

Have you shed any tears about the 1000 Chinese who passed on since you last posted? Why not you heartless b******? See how this works?

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

The polling on support for this 'war' doesn't remotely support your theory - across our political spectrum, the majority of people don't support the war and don't want us involved (70% of voters oppose UK involvement, only 17% support it).

Even anecdotally on here, there doesn't seem to be much correlation between support for Trump and support for this war - plenty on here seem to support Trump but not the war.

Ask people if they want war and they will usually say no. Ask people to name the Prime Minister and many would struggle.
The people that matter are those in charge. Most are on the left and desperately clinging to power.
They want to encourage immigration while pretending to do the opposite and pander to minorities, especially Muslims, to secure their block votes.
This all ties into their reluctance to support the war and support America and Trump even though they would go begging to them for help if Europe was ever attacked.
Trump for his part should have consulted Britain on the attack if he wanted them on board, but I actually think that the Americans think Britain is leaky and cannot be trusted with security. You can't blame them with the government we currently have. They have bent over for Islam and are actively encouraging the Islamification of Britain. The general public aren't too good at joining the dots.

 

[ASCPFC]

Jeez.
It's not a question of not being bothered.
It's a question of whether we can do anything about it, is our tax money funding it, and are we in any way complicit.
If the answers to those questions are 'yes, yes and yes', then people are understandably going to start kicking up more of a fuss than if the answers are 'no, no and no'.
Its obvious really.

Have you shed any tears about the 1000 Chinese who passed on since you last posted? Why not you heartless b******? See how this works?

I'd say Afghanistan and Pakistan receive loads directly and, of course, indirectly from the UK. There'll be aid for a start, NGOs with tax payer funding, charities with tax payer funding (plus donations). And don't ask me how much money is sent by citizens and residents back home to these countries. That'll perhaps be 100s of millions. Even child benefit and/or other benefits are probably claimed by many people in these countries - despite rule changes.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Jeez.
It's not a question of not being bothered.
It's a question of whether we can do anything about it, is our tax money funding it, and are we in any way complicit.
If the answers to those questions are 'yes, yes and yes', then people are understandably going to start kicking up more of a fuss than if the answers are 'no, no and no'.
Its obvious really.

Have you shed any tears about the 1000 Chinese who passed on since you last posted? Why not you heartless b******? See how this works?

Having recently criticised me for a similar outlook to life and death, you are now using a similar argument.

Jeez.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Ask people if they want war and they will usually say no. Ask people to name the Prime Minister and many would struggle.
The people that matter are those in charge. Most are on the left and desperately clinging to power.
They want to encourage immigration while pretending to do the opposite and pander to minorities, especially Muslims, to secure their block votes.
This all ties into their reluctance to support the war and support America and Trump even though they would go begging to them for help if Europe was ever attacked.
Trump for his part should have consulted Britain on the attack if he wanted them on board, but I actually think that the Americans think Britain is leaky and cannot be trusted with security. You can't blame them with the government we currently have. They have bent over for Islam and are actively encouraging the Islamisation of Britain. The general public aren't too good at joining the dots.

So is opposition to the war about Trump or about politicians clinging to power? And are you talking about the public or politicians? Because you seem to be conflating all of the above.

All politicians are 'desperately clinging to power' - that's the nature of the beast. Pretending that's a left thing is silly.

The idea that Starmer's logic for not wanting to commit the UK to this completely nonsensical war, of which there is very little public support, and very little prospect of any success, is about 'pandering to Muslims' seems pretty farfetched to me - it's the most popular decision politically, across the board.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

So is opposition to the war about Trump or about politicians clinging to power? And are you talking about the public or politicians? Because you seem to be conflating all of the above.

All politicians are 'desperately clinging to power' - that's the nature of the beast. Pretending that's a left thing is silly.

The idea that Starmer's logic for not wanting to commit the UK to this completely nonsensical war, of which there is very little public support, and very little prospect of any success, is about 'pandering to Muslims' seems pretty farfetched to me - it's the most popular decision politically, across the board.

I'm expecting you to read my train of thought.

Politicians are always attempting to influence the public. It's quite easy to make people reject war or worry about their pockets.
We have never seen the likes of this political class. Politicians by nature tell lies of course, but the cynicism employed by this generation is staggering. You claim that this government isn't pandering to Muslims? Seriously?

Yesterday we had the Labour mayor leading a mass public prayer at Trafalgar square. Despite a huge spike in antisemitism, this government is preoccupied with creating a definition for 'Islamophobia'. Schools around the country are now having to pander to Islamic celebrations at the expense of other pupils. There are many other examples.
The attitude to this war is more typical of the far left and clearly designed to appease Muslims, the majority of whom are more sympathetic to Iran and Russia than Western values.

You're either being deliberately obtuse or you live in a cave.

 

[McAhuna]

I'd say Afghanistan and Pakistan receive loads directly and, of course, indirectly from the UK. There'll be aid for a start, NGOs with tax payer funding, charities with tax payer funding (plus donations). And don't ask me how much money is sent by citizens and residents back home to these countries. That'll perhaps be 100s of millions. Even child benefit and/or other benefits are probably claimed by many people in these countries - despite rule changes.

That's the situation in peacetime.
For the record I'd agree with cutting our foreign aid budget and tax-funded NGO budgets, especially for countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan with questionable human rights records.

But I doubt very much either country will be receiving more money from us as a result of their military spat.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

I'm expecting you to read my train of thought.

Politicians are always attempting to influence the public. It's quite easy to make people reject war or worry about their pockets.
We have never seen the likes of this political class. Politicians by nature tell lies of course, but the cynicism employed by this generation is staggering. You claim that this government isn't pandering to Muslims? Seriously?

Yesterday we had the Labour mayor leading a mass public prayer at Trafalgar square. Despite a huge spike in antisemitism, this government is preoccupied with creating a definition for 'Islamophobia'. Schools around the country are now having to pander to Islamic celebrations at the expense of other pupils. There are many other examples.
The attitude to this war is more typical of the far left and clearly designed to appease Muslims, the majority of whom are more sympathetic to Iran and Russia than Western values.

You're either being deliberately obtuse or you live in a cave.

That's hard to do when the train keeps changing track!

I claimed the government hasn't made their decision on whether to involve ourselves in this war based on 'pandering to Muslims'.

The same way our position on Israel/Gaza clearly wasn't influenced by 'pandering to Muslims'.

I appreciate you're somewhat obsessed with the topic, and whilst I think certainly there is evidence of this pandering in other ways across our politics, I think you're grossly overstating the extent of it, presumably to try and rationalise why your view is the minority one on this topic.

The attitude to this war is a result of people having seen this script plenty of times in recent history, and knowing it's a road to nowhere. That, in the context of declining living standards and a country falling apartment at the seams, make it inevitable that most people don't want us pumping millions into a completely unnecessary war.