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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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