Islam4uk March Through Wootton Bassett

[Rog]

Well, like I said, violence has be justified. But it is an extremely difficult thing to justify. We do not allow violence within our own societies except in specific circumstances, and even these are controversial.

 

Surely justification for employing violence includes circumstances when the other party incorporates violence as a conventional means of achieving their aims.

 

And we hold true to these values in our considerations of how we would response to particular acts originating from other western countries.

 

There is the nub. Other Western Countries, or more like other countries that share our values. There are those who do not and see our values as cowardice, other nations with ideologies that see compromise as surrender.

 

The hypocrisy is when we abandon these moral values when our government threatens the poorer nations.

 

Is it hypocrisy to take a knife to a knife fight? Personally I believe it is better to take a bloody big gun to a knife fight but that’s me.

 

A war can be justified, or rather a war can be justified if for example the result was to end up under control of a more oppressive regime.

 

WW2, for example, would be justified as a national war. However, I find that almost all national wars are unjust given the interests of those who initiate the war and those who suffer most from it.

 

WW2 could be said to have started with the presentation of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919.

 

But even if the declaration of war against Germany by the UK is taken as the starting point it could be argued that Germany was only responding to having ended up under the control of a VERY oppressive regime that stole huge tracts of territory from it.

 

Remember, WW2 was declared not because of Hitler’s blitzkrieg, of any persecution of Jewish people, but because the recovery of the Sudetenland and tracts of Germany that had been taken to create Poland offended the British.

 

Maybe a better justification for a war is when it becomes a matter of survival.

 

We ARE at war with Islam. It is not a war we created nor is it (yet) a war we accept that we are engaged in although the activists and armed sections of Islam are in no mistake that they are, and the very sugestion of a march through what has beocme a national treasure to our fallen heros is bad enough, attempting to justify it is disgusting.

[Terse]

Why don't they just strew rashers of bacon over the roads?

[invader]

I said it would get nasty.

[jimbms]

Why don't they just strew rashers of bacon over the roads?

We could use pork pies as land mines

[asitis]

I really wanted to present an intellectual argument for the banning of the march and I now see they are trying to hold the Gov. to ransom saying they will cancel it with conditions, however I have failed to control my inner self and think that a line in the sand is being crossed by these motherxxxxxxx and if it goes ahead with apologies to the beautiful Wootton Bassett I hope that their opponents are there in numbers !!!

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I disagree with you quite alot over this - I think it isn't incidental at all - infact they are strongly parallel each other - the UK population won't stand for any and all military adventurism no matter how useful to the 'elite' as you put it. They can be pursuaded to support adventurism if they believe the end result is a better situation - in Afghanistan and Iraq most people agreed that Saddam or the Taliban operated benighted governments which terrorized their populations.

No, it won't stand for any conflict or war. The public can be convinced, however, to support a good deal of military adventurism if I they can convinced.

 

Most people agreed that Iraq and Afghanistan had governments which the people would better off losing. But this was not the war aim justification for war espoused by the government in either case, even though it is good that the Taliban and Saddam are not in government.

 

"...for all the demonstrations the wars did have majority support when they started, and many people have the opinion we shouldn't leave until the situation is stabilized - that has started occur in Iraq and so the UK has left, but is still a long way away in Afghanistan.

Again, these were not war aims. Such talk of setting up democracy and stabilising the country after invasion were after thoughts sold to the public to make the wars more acceptable to the public.

 

Er - what - where? I think I've been pretty consistent in supporting the strategy of stabilizing Iraq and Afghanistan with governments which are more tolerent and open. Tactically its been a total mess, but I've always supported the basic war aims.

Each time the strategies have changed? I see you support the latest aims which the government has declared - which is to set up compliant and easily controlled liberal democratic regimes.

 

One was started because the US wanted Bin Laden. It was some time after the planning and initiation of war that the idea of removing the Taliban was thought of.

And Iraq was ostensibly about WMD.

Neither of the reasons for going to war were justified.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Surely justification for employing violence includes circumstances when the other party incorporates violence as a conventional means of achieving their aims.

The Taliban?

 

There is the nub. Other Western Countries, or more like other countries that share our values. There are those who do not and see our values as cowardice, other nations with ideologies that see compromise as surrender.

Oh, so the rule is to abandon our values when we deal with others? Whether or not they see compromise as surrender, there are issues of international law that are supposed to be adhered to. And the West ought to act upon those values that comprise of a better morality.

The West wasn't threatened by the Taliban - there is no issue of surrender.

 

Is it hypocrisy to take a knife to a knife fight? Personally I believe it is better to take a bloody big gun to a knife fight but that’s me.

And where is this knife fight? I don't know what you are talking about?

 

WW2 could be said to have started with the presentation of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. But even if the declaration of war against Germany by the UK is taken as the starting point it could be argued that Germany was only responding to having ended up under the control of a VERY oppressive regime that stole huge tracts of territory from it.

Maybe.

 

Maybe a better justification for a war is when it becomes a matter of survival.

Well that would be a good reason, wouldn't it. But neither Afghanistan nor Iraq are wars about survival.

 

We ARE at war with Islam. It is not a war we created nor is it (yet) a war we accept that we are engaged in although the activists and armed sections of Islam are in no mistake that they are, and the very sugestion of a march through what has beocme a national treasure to our fallen heros is bad enough, attempting to justify it is disgusting.

We may be at war with some elements of Islam. And no doubt to some degree British and US foreign and economic policy has led to people wanting to take up arms.

It doesn't make invading other countries justified and moral. And they aren't my heroes.

[gazza]

It doesn't make invading other countries justified and moral. And they aren't my heroes.

 

Thats what your friends in that group want to do in the uk,

[MilitantDogOwner]

I find it hard to see how the UK squaddies are brave,I would say more foolish and mostly young lads with little other option for work/adreniline buzz.The soldiers in the past,whatever side who went over the trenches knowing the horror that awaited them,thats brave.

 

Says the faceless anonymous internet forum poster.

 

Until you have actually been in a life or death combat situation, you haven't got a clue what your on about.

[MilitantDogOwner]

Lets face it, LDV will go against anything if its got a uniform, money or some sort of structure to it.

 

LDV could never live up to the high standards of Her Majesties finest and wouldn't last five minutes amonst the men and women of the Forces.

 

LDV in my eyes your just as bad as the suicide bombers.

[macmannin]

Im a faceless,anonymous internet poster like yourself.

[manxy]

to MCB

Turns out Islam4UK are nothing but a fringe extremist group linked to Omar Bakri.

 

Even the the Muslim Council of Britain wants nothing to do with them:

 

http://www.mcb.org.uk/media/presstext.php?ann_id=367

Yep, hats off to MCB for not supporting this extremist group

[MilitantDogOwner]

Im a faceless,anonymous internet poster like yourself.

 

Difference is I've been to Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi & Afghanistan. I have also served in the Falklands and Bosnia.

 

Where did you serve?

[Terse]

Im a faceless,anonymous internet poster like yourself.

 

Difference is I've been to Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi & Afghanistan. I have also served in the Falklands and Bosnia.

 

Where did you serve?

Behind the bar in the Clarendon. Now that really was dangerous!

[manshimajin]

Remember, WW2 was declared not because of Hitler’s blitzkrieg, of any persecution of Jewish people, but because the recovery of the Sudetenland and tracts of Germany that had been taken to create Poland offended the British.

 

We ARE at war with Islam.

You should really have said "to recreate Poland" by handing back lands seized by Germany from it in the past (the great central European merry-go-round).

 

It would appear from historical documents that it MIGHT have been possible to stop German expansion at the time they re-occupied the Rhineland if a sufficient and determined military response had taken place - certainly that was the big fear of the German generals and they had indicated that they would pull back if it did happen. So whilst war is the ultimate failure of diplomacy (as von Clausewitz pointed out) on occasions it may be necessary to set a firm line in the sand (or mud) in order to prevent even worse violence developing as happened in WWII because of appeasement. Napolean found a "whiff of grapeshot" an effective way to head of trouble pdq.

 

In relation to Islam - I suggest you exaggerate Rog. I think we are at war with certain people who use Islam as an excuse to promote their own power seeking agenda and who are interpreting Islam to condemn their perception of moral decay caused by 'western culture'. One can debate the second point as there are some very poor aspects about Western culture - but the same for most cultures. The former though IMO means not that we are fighting a religious war but a typical power struggle war.

 

I have no quarrel whatsoever with the Ahmadiyya Moslems who preach great tolerance for all religions and are truly lovely people to talk with. OTH they are of course being persecuted by the extremist Moslems because of this.