Stop "the" war - which wars?

[belboid]

Before I start dishing out Cop-Out Awards Of The Month, I'll just ask:

its generally considered bad form to give an award to yourself

What the left will do IF there's an invasion of somewhere that is not part of the mid-east?

how about you respond to the points made in answer to your bollocks, insterad of just repeating this one point over and over?

 

[Donna Ferentes]

They never mentions the wars that :

Are started by leftist forces.
Are started by extremist muslims.
Have no political gain for lefties.
Have no Jews involved to bash.

The left's anti Israeli racism is shocking considering their stance of anti racism but all the silly ends of politics need an enamy. Odd that he far right and far left both like to jew bash. At least the BNP admit they are racists. Not much of a plus for them but one over the silly left.

That about takes care of that list. Any other questions ?

Yes. Will you mind if I report you for trolling? You've been warned before about throwing accusations of "jewbashing" about.

 

[Fruitloop]

Oooh, cheap accusations of anti-semitism. They're really got the big guns out now

 

[X-77]

What the left will do IF there's an invasion of somewhere that is not part of the mid-east?

And how much of it's current activist base would take part in any antiwar protests organised as a result?

yes I'm sure if this country/the US invaded anywhere other than the Middle-East then the left would have absolutely no problem with that whatsoever and would simply say 'fuck them, they're not in the Middle-East, who cares'? - are you actually believing this shit yourself by the way?

 

[big footed fred]

Yes. Will you mind if I report you for trolling? You've been warned before about throwing accusations of "jewbashing" about.

Feel free but consider the left winger's post on this forum are very anti israeli, very anti jewish and just for good measure never mention anything anti muslim.
(see red ken's camp guard comments)
It's a pity as it's dragging the name if Islam into the Mud.
Supporting the extreme Islamists that are just out to kill for whatever cause just dirties the name of a religion that I have seen the good side of.

Doing Palestinians a favour - total bollocks. Support for these nutters is forcing more years of war and suffering on the poor sods that have to live there.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

There is not an anti-Jewish post on this thread.

 

[Fruitloop]

Ken's camp-guard statement was crass but not anti-semitic.

 

[big footed fred]

There is not an anti-Jewish post on this thread.

Have a look around other threads. They use zionists but mean jews as the BNP use niggers and pakis to mean anyone they dislike.

Same silly attacks against a group for no reason other than race or religion.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Have a look around other threads. They use zionists but mean jews as the BNP use niggers and pakis to mean anyone they dislike.

No they don't. You assert but produce no evidence. You are a liar, sir.

 

[greenman]

I think Teejay should take note of the company he has attracted. The only two posters to back his view so far are our resident 'three yorkshiremen' parody-reactionary and the uber-pessimist poster who thinks every struggle or conflict is lost to the progressive side before it has even started.

Wars in the Middle East attract more attention for a number of reasons - one because they have more potential for spilling over into more global problems (terrorism, oil related issues, major power interests) than conflicts in say Burma or Zimbabwe. Secondly (and for the first reasons) the major powers, including the Anglo-American conglomerate power (that most posters here live under and believe rightly or wrongly they can affect in some way) have interests, positions and involvement in the conflicts that are more important to them than in countries like Burma or Zimbabwe.

However, I think the belief that the left in Britain is only interested in the Middle East is patently ludicrous - do those arguing this really think that the STWC, and the left in general would sit quietly by while war broke out (with or without direct US involvement) in Venezuela or Cuba, to give but two examples?

 

[Fruitloop]

The idea that the entire left is motivated primarily by its hatred of Jews is just as delusional as thinking the shape-shifting lizards are in control. I smell desperate trollage.

 

[poster342002]

the uber-pessimist poster who thinks every struggle or conflict is lost to the progressive side before it has even started.

In my experiance, just about every struggle has been lost before it has even started. In all my lifetime, I have not seen one victory for our side. Not one. We've had TWO DECADES of being routed at every turn, with no hope of that changing on the horizon. I've lost the energy to be able to fool myself that after a thousand defeats, the thousand-and-first will yield a victory. Sorry - but I've run out of the groundless optimism needed.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

No, really?

 

[belboid]

I thought you were older than 15.

Or did we actually lose the Poll Tax campaign?

 

[Fruitloop]

Why not try stamping your foot lots while crying? That might work.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

 

[poster342002]

I thought you were older than 15.

Or did we actually lose the Poll Tax campaign?

The fact that the poll-tax campaign is about all you can point to speaks volumes. And the sad fact is, ridding ourslevles it was a last-gasp of our side's strength rather than a springboard to anything more. The even sadder fact is that it wouldn't happen now - they'd now be able to get clean away with a poll tax (among other reasons probably by painting a green-gloss over it so the green-tailing left kept quiet).

 

[belboid]

No, the sad fact is you are/were talking crap but cant admit it. There are hundreds if not thousands of much smaller campaigns that have won results as well.

And I note you still haven't responded to any of the criticisms of your absurd thesis that 'lefties' only care about the middle-east.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

 

[greenman]

I am not here to uncritically defend the STWC, it has some dodgy "allies" in its' 'big tent', and has made some dubious decisions, and used questionable slogans (I would be happier if there were less demonisation of individual 'warmongers' and more concentration on analyses of the underlying economic and political basis of many of the current conflicts).

However, it seems to me that the criticisms of STWC (and the Brit left as a whole, by implication) in this thread are based on over-pessimism, cynicism, stereotyping and basically right wing assumptions about the motivation and philosophy of the left and the peace movement.

 

[bluestreak]

yeah fred, all this is cos we hate jews. what about the jews who are anti-zionist and anti-IDF?

 

[TAE]

Which wars exactly are the STWC against?

They've made that quite clear on their website:

http://stopwar.org.uk/AboutUs.htm

to stop the war currently declared by the United States and its allies against 'terrorism'.

 

[TAE]

They never mentions the wars that :

Are started by leftist forces.
Are started by extremist muslims.
Have no political gain for lefties.
Have no Jews involved to bash.

This is true to a degree, but I think that's partly because western governments rarely support such wars so there's little to protest against domesticly.

 

[bluestreak]

This is true to a degree, but I think that's partly because western governments rarely support such wars so there's little to protest against domesticly.

i'd agree with that too.

 

[big footed fred]

This is true to a degree, but I think that's partly because western governments rarely support such wars so there's little to protest against domesticly.

Bit of both.
I have to admit that I would like to have seen israel gone in the early days.
Bad at the time but all this trouble would never had happened.

 

[kropotkin]

could it be about opposing the Project for An New American Century or whatver its called? The project to push american imperialism over the entire globe and dominate the world that way? Which makes those wars (notably tho not restricted to the M-E - Afghanistan is not arabic for one obvious example) of a wider significance than (utterly horrific from a humanist POV) ones occuring in, say, Western Sahara.

I wouldnt expect a right-wing liberal like teejay to get the difference, but I'd have thought you would poster.

yeah, those reasons and...

I think it might have something to do with the orientation of the SWP and liberals towards the "muslim community", and their attempts at recruiting from that constituency.

 

[TeeJay]

could it be about opposing the Project for An New American Century or whatver its called? The project to push american imperialism over the entire globe and dominate the world that way? Which makes those wars (notably tho not restricted to the M-E - Afghanistan is not arabic for one obvious example) of a wider significance than (utterly horrific from a humanist POV) ones occuring in, say, Western Sahara.

Sorry this doesn't really work does it?

In South America the US are directly involved with Colombia. Turkey is a NATO member.

In South and SE Asia: Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines - how many of these are *not* supported by the US or have the US in some way involved?

The same question can be asked for Africa: Somalia, Sudan, Chad, Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Western Sahara, Côte d'Ivoire, Senegal

Russia also projects its own imperialism into the caucuses and central asia. Why doesn't this count for anything?

You say that we can exclude the Western Sahara war from the 'PNAC' list but are you really arguing that we can exclude most of the others?

If Israel's attacks on Lebanon are included on the basis that the US is somehow an ally or behind Israeli action then why exclude a whole list of other conflicts where the US takes sides or supports a government or other group involved in the conflict?

Reagardless of my political views your proposed criteria - that STWC focusses on 'PNAC' wars is false - they actuall exclude a whole range of conflicts that have some level of US involvement.

Why?

 

[TeeJay]

Doesn't it sort of make sense to concentrate on the ones we're militarily involved in? In the first instance at least?

Again this criteria can't explain the STWC list: the UK is not involved militarily with the Israeli-Lebanon war. If you use an 'arms length' involvement argument then the list where the UK is involved (eg by selling arms, sending aid to a government and supporting it with trade and diplomatically) is far longer than that selected by the STWC.

Therefore 'the UK being involved' can't be the criteria used, unless someone is cherry picking some conflicts and completely ignoring others - but on what basis?

 

[TeeJay]

I don't think it's a question of relevance at all. There's no more need to oppose a land invasion of North Korea than there is to oppose an invasion of the moon at the moment.

I have listed a whole load of "ongoing wars" which are happening right now.

Why are the STWC not protesting about any of them?

 

[urbanrevolt]

If Teejay is trying to make a point to broaden our activism to oppose all imperialist wars that the U|K government is complicit in then, fine.

It sounds more like an attempt to sabotage the necessary call for mass mobilisations against Israel's war on Lebanon.

Even The Independent today had a good front page showing that it's two countries who are blocking any restraint on Israel- the US and the UK.

Blair has backed Israel to the hilt.

The labour movement and left in genrral should be mobilising for mass demonstrations against this war.