True national hero who has not had to engage in warfare to be a hero.

​

Dear Ian Kirk-Smith - and copied to my war voting MP, James Morris Esq

I drove over to a meeting with Ludlow Quakers last night to hear your outstanding and veteran, national hero, John Lynes speak about the history of the Middle East and its present turbulence.

For 

​one

 decade, John 

​was

 part of Christian Peacemaker Teams, observing and recording man's inhumanity to man.  He explained that such work does have a moderating effect in abating violence.  If these brave men and women are held, they and their spouses have signed that no ransom is to be paid and no rescue launched.

From last night's meeting I have concluded that talking to terrorists is invariably done, sooner or later and that Islamic State, that we call murderous barbarians, akin to Hamas trying to wipe iron clad Israel off the face of the earth with pinpricks on a map, are wanting a caliphate based on the First Caliphate of the 7/8th century.  John said that it was a golden age of Islam, with a level of civilisation well ahead of that of Europe. 

​

 Jews and Christians mostly lived peacefully in Muslim countries, but often had to pay an additional tax.  Before the 18th century, Jews were certainly better treated by Muslims than by Christians.

I was reminded that Islamic State is fighting for a caliphate free from Western interference, and modeled on earlier caliphates.  Perhaps, we can hardly be surprised at that after 100 years of off and on Western military intervention and of British duplicity in the Middle East!

Further, can UK aerial bombing of Islamic State be justified when our Parliament chose to commence air strikes only after two American held hostages were beheaded in retaliation for American bombing of Islamic State?  Free humanitarian gifts from the air for all the refugees would be more in line with the life and teaching of the non-violent Christ of the Gospels whom some Muslims feel that the 'Christian' West should be following.

Finally, when I mentioned to the organiser that I was a visitor, he kindly gave me a copy of the outreach issue of 'The Friend' and invited me to write when I said, "What I would really like is for Quakers to conscientiously abstain from voting for the three main political parties who so love to conduct their crimes of aggression and warfare in the Middle East."  I might also have added that there might be a non-violent Green Party candidate standing, however, that would fit the bill nicely for the ethical voter!

Yours sincerely

Remembering what went wrong over our so virtuous military intervention in Iraq

This is written ten years on since London was awash with 1-2 million opponents of our nation's intention to attack, invade and occupy Iraq.  "Britain's biggest ever political protest"  (Andrew Murray in the Guardian 15.2.2013).  This blog has partly relied on that article (here, in double quotation marks) to catalogue the many blunders of those who should have been men and women of integrity and honour.  Instead, I think, they became war criminals and terrorists.

1. Iraq is steeped in history.  It is the birthplace of civilisation.  Indeed, the birthplace of Abraham who was the father/founder of three world faiths - Judaism, Christianity and Islam.  Even so, they are at loggerheads and, there is an absence of understanding or even respect amongst them.  Each faith believes that it alone has the Truth and Right on their side.
2. There was an over reliance on what the enemies of Saddam Hussein were saying about his weapons of mass destruction (WMD).  An over-reliance because he was no longer our friend but was our enemy by this time.
3. An under-reliance on finding the evidence for WMD before the attack commenced on the 19 February 2003.
4. Our crime of aggression in attacking Iraq seems to have been about finishing the job from the Gulf War of 1990/1, when we failed to remove Saddam Hussein and had been kicking ourselves ever since for not doing so.
5. Saddam was no friend of Al-Qaeda, not an Islamist or militant Muslim and, he governed a secular state.  Yet, it was widely believed that he was, in order to help justify attack, regime change and occupation by ourselves - and retribution for 9/11!
6. The UN inspectors were not allowed to finish the job before our premature and over-enthusiastic desire for the opening shock and awe attack.  Unseemly haste, sidelining, even dismissing our own, Western, weapons inspectors.  They didn't come up with what we wanted them to say, so we went ahead anyway before their final and definitive report confirming that there were almost certainly no WMD.
7. The UN did not "give the attack a patina of legality." Andrew Murray (patina = shallow covering or cosmetic gloss)
8. The war did not make the Christian West safer from terrorism.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  We saw martyrdom videos showing that the martyrs saw themselves as soldiers defending Islam from the Christian Western attackers and occupiers of holy Muslim soil.
9. The Iraqi people did not welcome the invaders as liberators.
10. "Tony Blair was motivated solely by his secret pledges to stand by President Bush come what may."
11. "Consideration of legality and British public opinion scarcely registered with him."
12. "The Iraqi people have paid a staggering price" for the unwarranted and unlawful eight year war.
13. "The war was justified by the dodgy dossier" and a student's dissertation.
14. Justified by: "The 45 mins Iraqi missile threat."
15. There was "Duplicitous diplomacy."
16. Saddam Hussein - a one time ally and excellent customer of our highly valued arms industry and traders.
17.  This man and many tens of thousands of his citizens were wiped off the face of the map without a trial for him or, UN support for such extra-judicial killing by ourselves.
18. Even after Saddam was removed from power and we were in total control throughout the country, still no WMD could be found.  In other words, we were completely fooled and our intelligence experts and politicians proved, yet again, to be in the wrong.  They were led up the garden path.  They are guilty and were gullible.  They are war criminals.