This morning I spotted the following letter in the Daily Telegraph.
Sir – So, the launcher of the illegal war on Iraq — Tony Blair — is condemning North Korea's underground nuclear test as "irresponsible act". It seems that there is one law for the West and another for the East.
So, because the writer believes something that happened in the past was "illegal" that thereby invalidates Tony Blair from holding a correct view on North Korea? Why is it so many people fail to get that the world is a planet of nations and not some sort of homogenous political order?
The world is in fact a very large playground with competing powers of varying degree. When one acknowledges that reality the argument of "one law for the us and another for them" becomes meaningless. The actions of states should only ever be viewed within the context of the situation in which they act. Not on the basis of how they might have acted previously.
What worries me most though about the view expressed in the letter is that it seemed to tacitly suggest that North Korea be allowed nuclear weapons, which is just.. well.. silly.
12 comments:
Dizzy
I don't think them having nukes is silly. What gives us the right to dictate who can and can't. Who put us in charge?
You said:
So, because the writer believes something that happened in the past was "illegal" that thereby invalidates Tony Blair from holding a correct view on North Korea?
Actually, it's not just based on that one thing. Corruption, Lies,
Mr Kelly's death, The Hutton Report signed by Cherie, a messed up NHS, poor education system and failing our troops in terms of pay, armour and safety is a safe bet for starters. We are, rightly or wrongly a very easy going country of peoples. We do give people the benefit of the doubt. But I don't think we have it in us to forgive, forget or believe the liar anymore.
Leave Korea to it. We have enough crap to be dealing with. ID Cards, Iris Scans and of course finger printing just to buy groceries. I don't believe in going into another bloody war to big up anyone’s proverbial manhood. Let’s leave that to his ugly, insensitive, fat bint of a wife.
Let's stop talking shite because we clearly all need to draw that very much line in the sand.
Who gives the UK the right to dictate who can and who can't have nuclear weapons?
The economic and military might of the UK does!
As Dizzy said, these issues must be considered with the context in mind.
In addition, your argument suffers from the ad hominem fallacy; that someone's opinion is wrong simply because of who they are.
This is not about Tony Blair being a liar (i think he is), but about whether or not it is in the UK's and the world's best interest for a state like North Korean to have nuclear weapons. I suggest it isn't.
Teri, you said......
"Actually, it's not just based on that one thing. Corruption, Lies,
Mr Kelly's death, The Hutton Report signed by Cherie, a messed up NHS, poor education system and failing our troops in terms of pay, armour and safety is a safe bet for starters."
What on Earth does that have to do with making a judgement about whether its a good thing for N. Korea to have nuclear weapons? In an egalitarian spirit, one could conclude that permitting such a despotic regime that doesn't even give a stuff whether its own population starves 'should' have just as much 'right' to nuclear weapons as any other country. Or one can be judgemental in the interests of sanity.
Sticking your head in the sand by leaving Korea to it (as you suggest) may be your preferred option. Me - I prefer my eyeballs unclogged.
"...a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing!"...
Anon
I totally disagree. Why is everyone jumping up and down about this issue? I don't perceive them to be a threat. Iran on the other hand are.
What utter nonsense about economy and military might of the uk does. Go and tell that to the electorate who are constantly out of pocket and over taxed due to funding this war, as well as parents, siblings and children's whose loved ones are fighting war because of that liar.
The boy who cried wolf springs to mind.
I suppose you now look Chinese from hiding in your room looking at pictures of Tony.
Dizzy: thanks for the topic, my keyboard is on fire.lol
Pagandiver: I'm not saying ignore the issue. I'm just not ready to jump up and down screaming we're all gonna die! What's this guy really going to do? In the meantime, what should we do, send more troops over there? We really can't sustain ourselves as a country and fight everyone's war. We can't even sort out the ones we've been blagged into! So how the fuck are we gonna get this sorted.
I say leave it alone for now. Let everyone else try and sort it and if they can't let them come to us at a later date.
Croydonian: Thank you! My point exactly. I just wish that i'd put it that way myself initially.
I wouldn't have to google words like ad homin bollocks or something or other.
Teri Said
Mr Kelly's death, The Hutton Report signed by Cherie, a messed up NHS, poor education system and failing our troops in terms of pay, armour and safety is a safe bet for starters."
By this I take she means that it is becoming harder and harder to take anything Blair says at face value.
This does not justify N Korea having the bomb, but it does justify taking a long hard look at Blairs information on this issue.
How do we deal with this issue in terms of sanctions. Will sanctions realy make a difference?
Sanctions would only include military and industrial components, not food.
In a roundtable discussion with the United States and China in Beijing on April 24, 2003, North Korean officials admitted for the first time that they possessed nuclear weapons. Furthermore, North Korean officials claim to have reprocessed spent fuel rods and have threatened to begin exporting nuclear materials unless the United States agrees to one-on-one talks with North Korea.
I came across this little nugget here
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html
So why has the world waited until now to do something about it?
It would seem that N. Koreas stance has not changed for the last two years at least.
This is bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted. As unpallatable as it is to see another country with a nuclear weapon, how do we stop them building it, mre importantly how do we take away the knowledge to do so?
The threat to export nuclear wepons has been known by the USA for the last two years, so woth this technology to sell, and terrorists with the money to buy how will sanctions work?
Neither Britain or America have the resources to take on yet another military front, so who will take the driving seat should direct action be decided upon?
Ok, I was out yesterday evening hence I've not responded to comments. Firstly, Teri, you asked "what gives us the right to dictate who can and can't [have nukes]?" My honest repsonse is to turn that question on it's head and say "what doesn't give us the right to do just that?"
I think, as has been pointed out by other, you're missing the point I was making in my post which was the essential argument the letter writer was making, and you have continued, is the classic ad hominen fallacy.
Putting it simply, it is not in the worlds interests to ignore what is happening in North Korea. There must be a response to it. Arguably China hold the key to situation being the hegemon in the area.
However, if North Korea manage to get a warhead on to their long raneg missles then Alaska becomes threatened. That means NATO is under threat, and we, that is Britain, have obligation under NATO that we cannot simply ignore.
The biggest problem really is that since the fall of communism people seem to have forgotten the signifcant of NATO and what it stands for in terms of defence alliance.
Teri, you also thanked Croydonian for soming up your point and wished you'd said it so well yourself. Croydonian was not, however, the person that said that. The person that said that was Neville Chamberlain, and he said it about Hitler's marching his troops across the Rhineland.
I am not saying don't take any action. I am simply saying that why does it have to be us yet again to get things moving?
Yes it can't be ignored. But to go off on one about it isn't the answer either. Yes china should take the lead but defo not us.
Our economy simply can't sustain another war effort when we can't get Iraq and Afghanistan sorted out. I don't believe the UN to be supportive of either causes and don't hold out much faith that they would support the UK in Korea.
That said, there is nothing wrong in assisting with the negotiations but I don't agree with our being at the forefront in taking military action. It's a collective effort!
As for Blair - well I'm not alone in my mistrust of what the man says. He has lied and mislead this country for a long time and I'm not about to apologise to ANYONE for my opinion that he's a liar. As a result I don't trust what he says and will not just form a definitive view for all out war without hearing and establishing what the rest of the International Community are going to do!
Let's not fall into the trap of going all wet just because North Korea has tested nuclear. In a speech at the Mansion House on 21 June 2006 Gordon Brown expressed his support for the nuclear deterrent.Together with The Freedom Association I gave support to his commitment since nuclear capability is, and will remain, a crucial lynch pin in maintaining the defence of this country, and in securing world peace.
The nuclear deterrent has protected this country for the past 60 years and it will be needed to continue doing so. At a time when North Korea has tested its nuclear capability and its ally Iran is suspected to be working towards a nuclear bomb, it would be foolish to ditch any line of defence. Nor can we know what the future might hold. The nuclear deterrent is essential and it would not be prudent to do anything other than continue it.
Post a Comment