Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Can you clarify reggie, is it a 'waste of time' because it's not active enough, or because it's lost its focus?


I'd argue that if it was the latter, then reduced activity would be a good thing - no-one needs a loose cannon aboard.


I must admit I haven't got a clue what 'Stop The War Coalition' is all about, not because I don't understand the concept of 'Stop The War', but because they've branched out and affiliated into a hundred other anti-globalism, anti-administration, anti-development causes. It's all Wolfie Smith.


What you need is a well-paid authoritarian marketing director to get things back on course.


I also think it's kind if daft - wars are conflicts of resource or ideology. It's naive to imagine that a unilateral pull back of UK or US armed forces is likely to do anything but create a temporary hiatus in destruction for pampered western middle classes. The issues over resource and ideology would remain unresolved.


Or is that the case really, 'Stop The War' are the new flagellants, trying to persuade the whole of western society to wear a hair shirt for the sins of our fathers?

this is what it says on the stop the war website.. but is also admits that broader aims may apply.


The aim of the Coalition should be very simple: to stop the war currently declared by the United States and its allies against 'terrorism'. We condemn the attacks on New York and we feel the greatest compassion for those who lost their life on 11th September 2001. But any war will simply add to the numbers of innocent dead, cause untold suffering, political and economic instability on a global scale, increase racism and result in attacks on civil liberties. The aims of the campaign would be best expressed in the name Stop the War Coalition

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So it's not stop a war/s at all, but stop being

> vigilant in the face of terrorism?


I suggest that vigilance is a different thing from war.

War is bombs,invasion,mass killings,etc

Vigilance is security checks,police,searches etc

No, I don't think so SMG


*scratches head*


I think war is a kind of yin and yang thing that is subordinate to tribal convictions. Fat superannuated Americans just capitalise on the opportunity.


I think the job of a clever oik is to manage but not attempt to prevent the consequence. It's like a leaky hosepipe, it's always gonna burst somewhere.


In that sense we're in the least destructive period of documented history.

I like to think that war is entered into a little less likely than venting some societal pressure


Afghanistan was about primarily about revenge and secondly about destroying al-Qaeda and punishing those who harboured them. We all entered into it because that's what NATO are supposed to do when one of is atttacked.


The problem was we suddenly remebered we're the good guys and we should do some nation building and throw a bit of demcracy in if we can. Both were done half heartedly and in an ersatz fashion. If we'd been pragmatic we'd have left them to it and dropped a few more bombs if the Taliban managed to oust the nasty warlords we put in power.


I think there were a series of agendas on Iraq, they have all been long discussed on here, but war on terrorism it most certainly wasn't. I think Blair was earnest in thinking it was about making the world safer and removing an 'evil' man from power, which just makes him stupid.


Safety valve though? A bit wishy washy that.

Once soldiers get killed and the politicians look foolish then pulling out gets harder and harder. Nation building started when we realised we couldnt 'win' but had to keep going with a new goal in mind.

Is east dulwich ready to help stop the war?

How is your safety valve Huguenot..still got some puff left?

I don't know if the Stop The War Coalition's a waste of time but its website comes across in a very Millie Tant style. It could have more effect on the British public if it appealed to them, rather than just appealing to people who want to protest.


And personally I don't like headlines like "The world says: troops home from Afghanistan now" - which I know is not true because I haven't been asked.


And they don't give many solutions as an organisation, it's all "that's bad", "that's bad" and "that's bad too". Do they have any viable solutions? Stop the War... and then what?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I am delighted to hear the development was approved.  In my opinion, the UK is building far too little housing. And unless we build on green belts, the only solution is to increase the density of our cities, which is exactly what this scheme achieves.  Where I'm from (France), planning is generally looser and in my home city it's common to see single dwellings being razed to make way for a 5-6 story block of flats, even in city centres. Does it change the character of the local area? For sure! But I don't see another way to provide the supply to meet demand and provide ample supply of housing for a growing population. My personal experience is that in the UK, there is a lot more time spent on consultations, on achieving a perfect outcome for everyone. This results in generally better and more harmonious building than in France, but it makes things slower and more costly, with the need to coordinate many consultants.  It's interesting to compare France and the UK as they have similar populations and population growth, with an economy centred on a huge capital city. When you look at the number of houses/flats built in France and the UK over the past 10 years, the result is pretty striking. # France UK Difference 2023 298,100 150,370 -147,730 2022 392,100 182,070 -210,030 2021 410,000 177,160 -232,840 2020 368,800 129,440 -239,360 2019 387,700 153,000 -234,700 2018 401,200 168,610 -232,590 2017 434,700 164,110 -270,590 2016 370,000 155,150 -214,850 2015 341,000 148,150 -192,850 2014 336,900 140,760 -196,140 2013 357,900 124,790 -233,110 2012 382,300 101,020 -281,280 Total 4,480,700 1,794,630 -2,686,070 Average 373,392 149,553 -223,839 When HS1 was built, the French engineers (it was built with the French high-speed signalling) were surprised at how Brits wanted to "gold-plate" everything. The UK arguably has the best, most effective, more reliable, more well-equipped high-speed line in the world, but we've only got 68 miles of it and it cost 2.5 times what it cost the French to build a line extension at the same time.  In my view, there's no magic wand: just deciding who will be the losers. In France, people in established neighbourhoods my lose out as they see them change dramatically, while the new entrants benefit from a much higher supply of housing (and thus cheaper housing). In the UK, we give greater priority to preserving the lifestyle and amenity of the established dwellers over the new entrants who lose out as the supply is choked and prices are higher. A final point of comparison would be the price per square foot of property in Greater Paris is £467 while in Greater London it's £667 - 30% cheaper!
    • This web page lists some companies that recycle CDs https://www.reducereuserecycle.co.uk/where_can_I_recycle/cds_and_dvds.php  
    • I heard it as well, woke me up, very strange.  I don't care for myself but I do worry for people with children and animals, it is a nuisance and happens more and more nowadays.
    • Has that ever actually happened? The bags are quite bright, and don't blend in with the pavement, so are quite noticeable. But surely there can't be many  cases where someone has bothered to put the s**t in a bag,  but then just leaves the bag on the pavement?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...