Page 1 of 2
British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:20 am
by Sciolus
Compare and contrast:
- Prime minister sends British troops to the middle east to overthrow an evil mass-murdering tyrant, with the support of parliament, because oil.
- Prime minister sends British troops to the middle east to support an evil mass-murdering tyrant, without the knowledge of parliament, because oil.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 1:28 pm
by plodder
wut?
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:00 pm
by Gfamily
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:21 pm
by lpm
I like oil. I think we should defend our oil supplies.
This is the cold war part of the Saudi wars - protecting against Iran-backed attacks. It's misleading to compare to hot war action.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:24 pm
by Bird on a Fire
They shouldn't have been there at all, but certainly not without parliamentary oversight.
Maybe "mercenary for hire" is a key pillar of Britain's post-brexit economic policy, along with selling weapons and trading fossil fuels.
(Yes, I know they seem to have lost a lot of money on this exercise, but I never said they were especially competent)
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:56 pm
by plodder
I always assume Britain has some sort of involvement in every conflict. If we could afford it we’d have boots on tge the ground. We’re a country hugely influenced by the military.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 3:10 pm
by JQH
plodder wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:56 pm
I always assume Britain has some sort of involvement in every conflict. If we could afford it we’d have boots on tge the ground. We’re a country hugely influenced by the military.
Maybe. Though I do wonder how keen the average soldier is on the "dying in a hot sandy place far from home" bit which the recruitment ads refrain from mentioning.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 4:27 pm
by Allo V Psycho
Billy Connolly:
I'm lyin' in bed, I'm in room twenty-six
Thinkin' on things that I've done
Like drinkin' wi' squaddies and bullin' my boots
I'm countin' the medals I've won
These hospital wards they're all drab lookin' joints
But the ceiling's as much as I see
It could do with a wee touch of paper or paint
But then again, maybe that's me
When I put my name down on the line
All that talk of computers and sunshine and skis
Oh, I'm askin' you, sergeant, where's mine
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 6:16 pm
by Sciolus
plodder wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 1:28 pmwut?
That's certainly one difference from the Iraq war: a brief mention on Radio 4 and a story in the Portsmouth News, and no-one knows anything more about it.
I'm just surprised we need to send them troops as well. They can't have used up all the stuff we've sold them in Yemen, surely?
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 8:35 pm
by jimbob
plodder wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:56 pm
I always assume Britain has some sort of involvement in every conflict. If we could afford it we’d have boots on tge the ground. We’re a country hugely influenced by the military.
We are, but a country that historically provides materiel to other countries to fight on the ground.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 9:38 pm
by Woodchopper
Sciolus wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 6:16 pm
plodder wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 1:28 pmwut?
That's certainly one difference from the Iraq war: a brief mention on Radio 4 and a story in the Portsmouth News, and no-one knows anything more about it.
I'm just surprised we need to send them troops as well. They can't have used up all the stuff we've sold them in Yemen, surely?
Troops are what the Saudis lack. Male Saudi citizens don’t want to be soldiers. It’s much more fun collecting sports cars. So the Saudis rely upon mercenaries. However they don’t want to rely upon mercenaries too much, as they might decide to take over. So the perfect solution is British squaddies. They’ll protect the oil fields but are very unlikely to mutiny.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 9:41 pm
by Woodchopper
Bird on a Fire wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 2:24 pm
They shouldn't have been there at all, but certainly not without parliamentary oversight.
Maybe "mercenary for hire" is a key pillar of Britain's post-brexit economic policy, along with selling weapons and trading fossil fuels.
(Yes, I know they seem to have lost a lot of money on this exercise, but I never said they were especially competent)
Britain has, apparently, sold to the Saudis at least £16 billion worth of arms and associated services over the last five years. Sending troops to protect the Saudi oil is a nice loss leader and helps to ensure that the client won’t experience problems paying up.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 10:54 pm
by Bird on a Fire
gosh I feel gross just reading that
Only a couple of years left till I can cut up my passport, and tbh it's getting increasingly tempting.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 7:18 am
by Woodchopper
Bird on a Fire wrote: Sun Nov 29, 2020 10:54 pm
gosh I feel gross just reading that
Only a couple of years left till I can cut up my passport, and tbh it's getting increasingly tempting.
Yes, it’s all utterly corrupt. Here’s a link to where the £16 billion figure came from.
https://caat.org.uk/homepage/stop-armin ... di-arabia/
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 7:59 am
by headshot
My next door neighbours are Yemeni asylum seekers who fled the war. That £16bn has helped drive a humanitarian crisis and led to increased immigration, which seems like something this Govt would seek to avoid...
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:26 am
by lpm
The answer isn't to confront the arms industry. It's to end the oil industry.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:18 am
by Grumble
lpm wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:26 am
The answer isn't to confront the arms industry. It's to end the oil industry.
I doubt that will end conflict, but it will remove some causes. More wars are coming because of global warming, disruption to water supplies will be massive when the ice caps melt off the Himalayas etc.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:05 am
by Blackcountryboy
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:18 am
lpm wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:26 am
The answer isn't to confront the arms industry. It's to end the oil industry.
I doubt that will end conflict, but it will remove some causes. More wars are coming because of global warming, disruption to water supplies will be massive when the ice caps melt off the Himalayas etc.
I wonder when we will have our first Lithium war.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:20 am
by Bird on a Fire
Blackcountryboy wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:05 am
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:18 am
lpm wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:26 am
The answer isn't to confront the arms industry. It's to end the oil industry.
I doubt that will end conflict, but it will remove some causes. More wars are coming because of global warming, disruption to water supplies will be massive when the ice caps melt off the Himalayas etc.
I wonder when we will have our first Lithium war.
Nearly happened last year in Bolivia.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 1:54 pm
by Woodchopper
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:18 am
lpm wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:26 am
The answer isn't to confront the arms industry. It's to end the oil industry.
I doubt that will end conflict, but it will remove some causes. More wars are coming because of global warming, disruption to water supplies will be massive when the ice caps melt off the Himalayas etc.
There will probably be lots of inter-communal conflict over declining or moving water resources. But there isn't much evidence that there will be full on wars over water.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:07 pm
by Grumble
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 1:54 pm
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:18 am
lpm wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:26 am
The answer isn't to confront the arms industry. It's to end the oil industry.
I doubt that will end conflict, but it will remove some causes. More wars are coming because of global warming, disruption to water supplies will be massive when the ice caps melt off the Himalayas etc.
There will probably be lots of inter-communal conflict over declining or moving water resources. But there isn't much evidence that there will be full on wars over water.
No, but a lot of people may be forced to move.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:10 pm
by Woodchopper
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:07 pm
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 1:54 pm
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:18 am
I doubt that will end conflict, but it will remove some causes. More wars are coming because of global warming, disruption to water supplies will be massive when the ice caps melt off the Himalayas etc.
There will probably be lots of inter-communal conflict over declining or moving water resources. But there isn't much evidence that there will be full on wars over water.
No, but a lot of people may be forced to move.
Certainly, but that will probably happen over a long time. What we are seeing in Nigeria and the Sahel is that migrations south by cattle herders are leading to conflict with farmers who are used to using the land and water resources for growing crops. There's a lot of conflict at the village level, but so far not something we'd call a war.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:22 pm
by Grumble
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:10 pm
Grumble wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:07 pm
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Nov 30, 2020 1:54 pm
There will probably be lots of inter-communal conflict over declining or moving water resources. But there isn't much evidence that there will be full on wars over water.
No, but a lot of people may be forced to move.
Certainly, but that will probably happen over a long time. What we are seeing in Nigeria and the Sahel is that migrations south by cattle herders are leading to conflict with farmers who are used to using the land and water resources for growing crops. There's a lot of conflict at the village level, but so far not something we'd call a war.
If city populations are forced to move rather than farmers then there will be an intensification of problems
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 2:47 pm
by plodder
Wars over water would be more chaotic than wars over oil, because water moves and can be replenished with a rainstorm or two.
Re: British involvement in overseas wars
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 3:08 pm
by lpm
There's no global strategic interests in water wars. Why would anyone give a sh.t if Sudan invades Ethiopia to control a river?
We established entire countries to control our oil. We die if they stop delivering. We can't abandon our puppet rulers in Saudi etc to their deserved fate until we've ended our addiction.