web analytics

start soul-searching? Bollocks!

By Mike Cunningham On August 30th, 2013 at 1:52 pm

The great debate is said to be commencing about Britain’s role in the world, and how wrong it was not to let Our Dave bomb Syria, even from a safe distance.

Allow me to place a few facts before the ATW audience, and see if you can agree with me that this isn’t the end of the world; isn’t the start of decay in our innermost souls; isn’t a sign that we are done for.

We are a trading nation, and our Armed Forces have always been committed to the protection of British interests around the world. One of the very few times when we went to war outside of those somewhat narrow confines is when we acted on Treaty obligations, and committed ourselves to a war against Hitler’s Germany; and it wasn’t until the war was nearly over did we begin to realise how lucky the world was that we did decide to fight. When the Death Camps were uncovered, when the long lists of those gassed, shot, poisoned or otherwise literally exterminated in the first tabulated Genocidal acts were seen by an angry world, Nuremberg was inevitable.

We should look and listen critically to the words of Chancellor Osborne, when he stated that, because we are a trading nation, we had a duty to intervene in a ‘civil war’; We have no trade with Syria, mainly because we have instituted sanctions against that unhappy country. The ONLY country in the immediate neighbourhood which is worthwhile signing a contract with is Israel, a democratic Nation which owes its very existence to a Britain who, despite or perhaps because of an Arab-oriented and very anti-semitic Foreign Office, finagled the Balfour Declaration into the first Jewish State. The rest of the Arabic crescent of so-called Nation-states, a ghastly rubble of despotic monarchs and ill-hidden military or religion-sodden dictatorships, aren’t worth bothering about, or risking a single British life to defend. The so-called Arab Emirates, another clutch of sandy despots, have oil, sun, sand and so-called holiday resorts; but try getting pissed just away from the main drag, or having a quick fumble with your girlfriend whilst not being married, and you will soon find out what they think of British attitudes. We are still attempting to extricate ourselves from the blood-soaked sands of Afghanistan, another dump where we may have been right to enter, but we should have got out one hell of a sight sooner that we are.

Yes, we are a trading nation, but we live in age when disputes are solved within civilized surroundings, within organizations such as the United Nations, ineffective though that rag-bag of territorial clowns might sometimes be. Our Armed forces are there to protect our people, and those we have stated that are under our protection by means of blood-ties, such as the Falklands, or even tiny Gibraltar. We have no right to state what is acceptable within a bloody civil war, partly because we did not put up much of an argument when America was dosing Laos and North Vietnam with Agent Orange, or wave our hands in horror when the F-105’s slammed their napalm down on the Vietcong and the Vietnamese alike. We didn’t say much about Georgia, when Russia came swanning in to carve out a big slice; mainly because it was none of our bloody business.

The Syrian war is a sad and bloody business, but it is their business; not ours: and we should spend very little time worrying about a truly sensible Parliamentary decision to stay the hell out of a shit-storm, especially when it ain’t our shit!


By David Vance On August 30th, 2013 at 7:07 am

Lest some get too carried away about the result in the Commons, spare a thought for these human beings. They are soon to be growing in number.


Still, Miliband “won” and here is why he “won”….



As Peter pointed out in a previous thread, Syria is a nasty civil war and no one will be a winner, all will lose. Yes, I too opposed any action BUT I see no cause for celebration.


By David Vance On August 29th, 2013 at 10:11 am

I supported the removal of the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. Why? Because they provided Al Queda with a base form which 9/11 was planned. I supported the liberation of Iraq from the Saddamite thugocracy. Why? Because he funded terrorism against Israel and had clear links to Al Queda. I oppose the removal of Assad by OUR forces. Why? Not our fight and the only winner would be Al Queda.

David Cameron has been made to look a fool in the pat 24 hours as he had to back track on his pledge to act immediately;

The Prime Minister has now said he will wait for a report by United Nations weapons inspectors before seeking the approval of MPs for “direct British involvement” in the Syrian intervention. Downing Street said the decision to wait for the UN was based on the “deep concerns” the country still harbours over the Iraq War. MPs had been recalled to vote on a motion on Thursday expected to sanction military action. Instead, after a Labour intervention, they will debate a broader motion calling for a “humanitarian response”. A second vote would be required before any British military involvement. This could now take place next week. In a statement on Wednesday night Downing Street said that it only wanted to proceed on a “consensual basis” and was now wary about becoming embroiled in another divisive conflict in the Middle East in the wake of Iraq.

The question that needs to be asked is what is the war aim? Obama has explicitly stated it is not regime change. So if it isn’t that., what is it? By destroying Assad’s chemical resources, assuming that can even be done, what will this result in? A weakened Assad benefits the “rebels” – the guys that kidnap and murder Catholic priests. So I repeat, what is the clear war aim? I don’t believe there is one – this is just play acting and shows how WEAK we are and how embroiled we are becoming in a region where, Israel apart, we have no friends. I say leave them to it – let Allah, not Obama, decide.

between Iraq and a hard place.

By Mike Cunningham On June 16th, 2013 at 5:06 pm

Said the Prime Minister, whilst crossing both sets of fingers behind his back:-

I want to help the Syrian opposition to succeed and my argument is this: yes, there are elements of the Syrian opposition that are deeply unsavoury, that are very dangerous, very extremist, and I want nothing to do with them

But there are elements of the Syrian opposition who want to see a free, democratic, pluralistic Syria that respects the rights of minorities, including Christians, and we should be working with them.

He warned supporters of President Bashar Assad to turn their backs on their leader or face “a day of reckoning” for their involvement.

We shall be striving to separate the ‘Good, Bad & Ugly’ before arming the chosen ones with ground-to-air missiles; and they all will have to promise, and ‘cross-their-hearts-and-hope-to-die’ not to sell these extremely sophisticated weapons on to jihadi groups who wish to do a ‘Woolwich’ on a slightly larger scale; he said.

Now all he has to do is lie convincingly enough to get a vote through Parliament; and he is ready to do a ‘Tony Bliar’ on Syria.

What is it with Eton-educated clowns which make them want to interfere with an Arabic dispute, between Arabs of varying sects, with the future promise of lots more bloodshed for anyone who wants to stick their soldiers’ noses into a war which is really none of their business?


By Pete Moore On June 14th, 2013 at 4:51 pm

The neocons make their move. Obama confirms that his paymasters will supply the terrorists, butchers and cannibals tearing Syria apart. Five minutes later the UK and France join in, with The Telegraph reporting that the three gangs (not “us or “we”) are meeting to decide how to run them weapons in.

Remember this and all the other surrenders to terror when we’re next supposd to believe that “we don’t talk to terrorists”. Of course they do, they always do, and now they’re again supplying the arms to terrorists so they can terrorise. Remember also that no evidence of sarin gas use by Assad has been presented. WMD lies? Fancy that! But they have to lie because the truth is that Assad is winning, and they just don’t like Assad. Do they know what the consequences will be? Of course not. We’ve seen that they have no idea. We know it.

So on the word of professonal spokesliars we’re supposed to believe that Assad is the bad one. The other side are “the rebels” see. Even when they murder in cold blood, and set off car bombs, and strafe kneeling prisoners with AK47s and cut out and chew into the hearts of slain enemies, they’re “the rebels” and now our money is taken to enable them to carry on terrorising. It’s a wicked, evil thing, but that’s our governors. Michael Rozeff describes them perfectly:

Neocons are a contemptible, vile, evil and despicable lot. Obama threw in with them on Iran sanctions, on Libya, on drone warfare throughout the world, on assassination policy, on government spying, on persecution of whistleblowers, and on government secrecy. Count Obama as a neocon. He too is a contemptible lying knave, a dishonest and unscrupulous scoundrel, intent as are the necons, on expanding  the American empire. This does not create a better world, I am sorry to say, but the neocons are too blind to see and understand this.


By Pete Moore On June 5th, 2013 at 12:59 pm

Things are going badly for the West’s pet islamists, butchers and cannibals in Syria. Sorry, I mean “the rebels”.

Syria: Assad forces take control of Qusayr in major breakthrough

The Syrian army has seized control of the strategic border town of Qusayr, in a major breakthrough for Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

What a remarkable coincidence then, for the old colonial power, France, to discover that Assad’s regime has been using Sarin gas. This is the second time that the “rebels'” sponsors have made the accusation. Maybe the UN will again contradict the claims by stating, as before, that the “rebels” were guilty of using sarin nerve agent.

The BBC has been at the forefront of anti-Assad propaganda. Beware anything it reports on Syria.


By David Vance On May 9th, 2013 at 7:28 am


We have no dog in the Syrian fight but we can still get bitten.

The Assad regime is appalling (as I have said for YEARS here on ATW and elsewhere) but then again so is the Al Queda driven opposition, the so called “rebels”. However for some reason, the West seems to want to arm the Islamic terrorist opposition which to my mind is verging on the lunatic.

The government has set out the case for lifting or amending the EU arms embargo against the main Syrian opposition group, the National Coalition. The UK said such a move would strengthen moderate forces in the opposition.

“Moderate Forces”????

The one thing that is missing in Syria is moderation in any regard. By arming the Islamic thuggery that seeks to topple Boy Bashar, all we are doing is laying down the seeds of the future caliphate, just as we are seeing in North Africa as we foolishly supported the “Arab Spring.”


By David Vance On February 3rd, 2013 at 2:17 pm

You have to laugh at the sheer brass neck!

Syria’s embattled President Bashar al-Assad has accused Israel of trying to “destabilise” his country.

I would have thought that’s what he has been doing!

It was his first remarks on last week’s reported Israeli air strike in Syria. Syrian TV has shown images of the raid Damascus says Israeli jets carried out on a military research centre in Jamraya last Wednesday. US officials said the air strike targeted a weapons convoy bound for Lebanon. The Israeli defence minister has hinted his country was responsible. Ehud Barak told a security conference in Germany on Sunday that the strike was “proof that when we say something we mean it”.

Syria, a client state of Iran, uses Lebanon to try and destabilise Israel. For Boy Bashar to whine about destabilisation is surreal.

When ‘red line’ doesn’t come from a rev. counter

By Mike Cunningham On December 5th, 2012 at 12:49 pm

When will Western politicians even begin to understand that they do not know ANYTHING about Middle Eastern politics, religion, tribal loyalties or any thought which expresses an ideal that ‘if only we can kill a few of the bad guys, all will be well’? We read, week after week, and ramping up to daily briefings from ‘connected observers’ that the US, France, the UK and other ‘friendly’ Governments are drawing ‘red lines’ in the sand. These so-called ‘red lines’ are based around the possible use of chemical weaponry by the Assad government against the rebellious bunch who loosely fight under the title of the ‘Free Syria’ movement. Not much of the UN mentioned around those ‘red line’ ideas, but, since China and Russia still wield a veto, the rest of the Security Council knows only too well that their opponents have learned to read.

Someone must explain, using cards and symbols if necessary, what the difference is between dying from a tank shell, or a mortar shell, or a cluster bomb, or a pre-laid roadside bomb; and a death by means of a nerve gas, a chemical spray or a contaminated water supply? There are no degrees of death, you are either alive, or you are dead, so what is the difference?

We are now watching as Obama, pushed no doubt by his military, starts thinking along the lines of ‘surgical strikes’ and ‘contained out-reach’, along with all the other bullshit phrases so beloved of the ‘Liberal Elite’ who see something nasty happening half a world away, and demand that ‘something should be done’. Our own clown prince Prime Minister of course is repeating the same slogans, warning one set of murderous fools against killing another set of murdering idiots, all the while continuing to downgrade our own military machine which of course he wants to use to kill one or other of the aforementioned fools if they don’t behave.

MY six-pennorth? Stand well back, and let them all kill each other; lending a hand only to aid the one Country, Israel: which just wishes to be left in peace, but, because of the internecine politics and hatreds of the whole region, is set up as a target once the next set of wild-eyed radicals gains power in that whole blood-soaked area!


By David Vance On November 7th, 2012 at 10:21 am

Amazing really but par for the course!

Britain is to open talks with gunmen seeking to overthrow Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad after David Cameron signalled that he would like to start arming the rebels. In a dramatic escalation of the UK’s involvement in the Syrian civil war, the Prime Minister will today give the green light for British officials to advise rebel commanders on the ground for the first time.

As you know, what happens in Syria is NOT our concern and whether Boy Bashar remains in power or whether radical Islamists grab the levers of control has NOTHING to do with us. But Cameron knows better and so Britain is now aligned with Al Queda.  Stunning level of stupidity.