Which is always something that’s mildly tickled me.
The sheer reach of Nik Nak’s Old Peculiar means I’m getting read by people across the planet.
By people across different time zones.
So … ?
Well … it’s tickled me.
But it does mean saying ‘Hello,’ in a video, rather interesting.
~≈§≈~
By the way, have you been keeping an eye on the news?
You’ll be aware — if you have — that there’s increasing demands for action against President Assad’s forces: in reply to his apparently use of chemical weapons against civilians.
Personally?
I really don’t care for the idea of the UK joining any such action.
There’s possibly lots of arguments for doing so.
Assad’s a nasty piece of work: and the war is harming civilians.
Wars ALWAYS harm and kill civilians.
But I personally feel there’s arguments against: even if they’re rather simplistic ones.
One … ? Is simple precedent.
We did nothing after Saddam Hussain’s regime used chemical weaponry agains the small town of Halabja.
Even when the Western Allies invaded Iraq — in the First Gulf War — they went in being able to show the Ba’athist regime had invaded Kuwait.
Even the Second Gulf War — where the evidence of the regime’s ownership of weapons of mass destruction was extremely shakey — Tony Blair at least tried to persuade the Bush Administration that getting UN approval would be good publicity.
The situation in Syria, now? And the West’s response to it?
I see there’s on-going investigations of President Trump’s election campaign: whether there was Russian involvement with the President’s campaign, or had Russian help.
I believe the West’s response to the situation in Syria has more to do with President Trump’s political problems at home, than it does with any defence of innocent civilians.
That it is spin, in other words. It’s the Trump regime’s attempt to look tough on Russia.
That is NOT a good reason for military action, or for Britain’s involvement*.
~≈§≈~
Let’s move on, shall we?
Yesterday’s Teaser saw Olga† and Debbi‡ putting in their answers: with both scoring five out of five.
Let’s see how everyone does with today’s questions, shall we?
* I ALSO believe that Jeremy Corbyn has a minor point. Theresa May’s government, much like Tony Blair’s before it, seems to be waiting for American instructions on what to do. Many of us voted to leave the EU, as they object to external controls on Britain’s decision making. I felt our involvement in the Second Gulf War was — likewise — us acting on foreign instructions. Any action on Syria, today, would be Britain acting — again — on American instruction. I, personally, object.
† That it is, Olga^, THAT it is … !
‡ Probably helps to transfer your iTunes library as well, Debbi^: then point iTunes at it, afterwards. (Hark at me!)
^ Sorry about the political rant, but the whole Syria thing — even where I think it’ll lead to another Homage to Catalonia — is … something we should have nothing to do with.
Q1) Afghanistan Q2) Clayton Farlow (my grandmother was a huge fan) Q3) 1975 Q4) The Union Forces Q5) Neil Kinnock It's always a difficult subject. I always get the feeling that there are hidden reasons behind any intervention in other countries that the public at large never gets to know. But, I'm reading a book called 'Memory Battles of the Spanish Civil War' at the moment, written by a Dutch historian who is a Hispanist professor in the USA and it does make quite interesting points. One of the things they wonder is how different things might have been in Europe if the other countries had taken a stand against Franco (who got support from Italy and Nazi Germany). Of course, there were volunteers and organizations that tried to help, but it is not the same. Times are very different, and I remember reading an article about how the discourse of universal justice was something fairly new and nobody would have used those arguments years back. Just in case you are interested... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Memory-Battles-Spanish-Civil-War-ebook/dp/B079CD3HKL/ It makes for a fascinating but uncomfortable reading at times.
I love it when someone comments. But, having had anonymous comments I feel may be libellous, actionable or just plain offensive, over the years?
I’d appreciate you* leaving your name — with a link to your website or social-media profile†, for preference — before you post a comment.
Should you choose to use a pseudonym/name, I’d appreciate it if that name were to be polite and inoffensive. I’d rather you kept it clean, and relatively grown up. Comments left with a pseudonym will be posted at my discretion: I really prefer a link.
Contentious, actionable or abusive posts left anonymously will not be posted. Nor will comments using offensive pseudonyms or language, or that are abusive of other commenters.
Thank you.
* I know many value their online privacy. I respect that. But hope you respect my wish to see who’s commenting on my blog: and my wish for you to introduce your self to me, and to your fellow commentors.
† Your Facebook, X/Twitter, Blogger, Instagram, TikTok or LinkedIn profile are acceptable. I also like seeing folks webpages.
Q1) Afghanistan
ReplyDeleteQ2) Clayton Farlow (my grandmother was a huge fan)
Q3) 1975
Q4) The Union Forces
Q5) Neil Kinnock
It's always a difficult subject. I always get the feeling that there are hidden reasons behind any intervention in other countries that the public at large never gets to know.
But, I'm reading a book called 'Memory Battles of the Spanish Civil War' at the moment, written by a Dutch historian who is a Hispanist professor in the USA and it does make quite interesting points. One of the things they wonder is how different things might have been in Europe if the other countries had taken a stand against Franco (who got support from Italy and Nazi Germany). Of course, there were volunteers and organizations that tried to help, but it is not the same. Times are very different, and I remember reading an article about how the discourse of universal justice was something fairly new and nobody would have used those arguments years back.
Just in case you are interested...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Memory-Battles-Spanish-Civil-War-ebook/dp/B079CD3HKL/
It makes for a fascinating but uncomfortable reading at times.
I can definitely see your point. Using war as a distraction from Trump's Russia problems is a problem.
ReplyDelete1. Afghanistan
2. Clayton Farlow
3. 1975
4. the Union
5. Neil Kinnock