Skip to main content

David Cameron + Libya x Tony Blair + Iraq = Disaster

David Cameron has sent his troops to Libya. After an agreement with the UN, UK as well as other countries like France and United States will "try to defeat and get rid of Colonel Gaddafi".

Doesn't that remind you of someone? *Coughs* Tony Blair and Iraq *coughs* Sorry, my throat needs clearing. Seriously though, David Cameron has made a big mistake and as soon as the British troops have only just gone out of Iraq.

The cuts which Cameron made seems to make up for this "war". This is no "War on Terror" which Tony Blair and George Bush created but Cameron's intentions is to get Gaddafi's leadership/dictatorship to end. Will it happen? If they manage to kill him like what Blair did to Saddam Hussein then maybe. Gaddafi won't resign that easily.

Let's look at the "positives". It is legal, unlike the Iraq war. Other countries have agreed to "fight for democracy" and all that tosh but they aren't doing unlawfully.

Ok, now for the negatives. First of all - the costs. It's going to cost a bomb (ironically speaking). So the University, the Health Service and everything else which was cut - that money will kill more innocent people. Well, they didn't go to Iraq and not kill anyone to find Saddam Hussein in the first place, did they? Remember the innocent people are also the people who support Gaddafi.

I hope the UN regrets their decision. Instead of their money they have spare for those suffering in Japan after the horrific 8.9 magnatude earthquake and tsunami, they go to Libya - not to get the British public out of the troubled nation because Cameron agreed to a "no-fly zone" but to spend the money on troops invading a country which doesn't deserve it, well done. There is no indication how much money will they intend to spend but I fear for the Libyans right now.

Let's try and be optimistic and hope the invasion won't take as long as the Iraq War and Gaddafi is more of a tougher opponent than Saddam Hussein because he's more popular. Hussein wasn't popular at all (remember the falling of the statues of him?).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Now isn't the time to choose a favourite baddie

Donald Trump and Benyamin Netanyahu (Image: Financial Times) I have been rather reflective of late. The global news agenda is dominated by powerful people doing unimaginably awful things, or at least capable of doing so - and they are seemingly given a free pass, having their evil justified, trying to find a reason why their actions aren't that bad compared to the 'other side'. And this is driving me absolutely mad. The less I hear from Benyamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump, Nigel Farage and others, the better this world will be. Here we have, at least three cunning maniacs, at it for their personal gain to dominate countries, nationalities and ideologies. Farage has no power, but he is being tipped to be the next UK Prime Minister , for no good reason at all. He gets a few votes from those bored of a Labour government, and critics start getting giddy. Trump thinks of himself as a puppet master, and through his crippling tariffs and mafia-like tactics, is sending his country an...

The 'cancel culture' myth

Let's cancel the term 'cancel culture' once and for all (Image: Fox News) In recent months, we have seen the UK's Supreme Court declare ' what a woman is ', the rise of the 'far right' in the United States and larger parts of Europe and the centre-left being accused of echoing words which were deemed unacceptable the day before. These stories as isolated items don't seem a big deal but, through their individual merits, have become significant societal shifts. That's largely thanks to the campaign groups who led them. For a long time, they have been playing cry wolf, sharing viral sop stories about how their 'plight' has resulted them being on the verge of 'losing everything', including relevance. With victories heading their way, and their crocodile tears turning into money eyes, it is fair to say that 'cancel culture' is officially over. Let's be honest, 'cancel culture' never existed. The myth has brainwashe...

Done right, digital IDs can save lives

Sir Keir Starmer has a challenge to convince people over digital ID plans (Image: The Guardian) If we're to treat survey results as gospel, I find myself in the minority on a big debate. It appears I am one of the very few in support of a 'digital ID' . It had taken me a while to come to this conclusion as, since the idea was explored under Tony Blair's government in 2005, I really wasn't sure what the point of the concept was. But 18 years later, I feel that an identification of some digital kind is necessary, and potentially lifesaving, as I'll explain here. The digital ID has been brought into the British political limelight again thanks to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer. He wants to bring them in on a mandatory basis, as a way of proving we have a right to work in the UK. It forms part of his cunning plan to halt illegal migration and illegal labour - similar schemes are already in place abroad and are said to be doing well. According to a government pres...