In one breath Key claims reinvading Iraq won’t make us a target yet in another breath he says there are many sympathisers here in NZ wanting to fight for IS – both breaths can’t be true.
Part of Key’s casual and laid back drumbeat for war is that there are surprising numbers of NZers who are IS sympathisers wanting to leave NZ to go and fight for IS in Iraq/Syria. So many in fact that he is considering a new law to prosecute them, yet now claims that us reinvading Iraq won’t make us a target.
Huh?
If there are so many NZers willing to go to Iraq and Syria to fight, why wouldn’t they see NZ as a target if we decide to reinvade Iraq? Key can’t have it both ways, we either have people prepared to fight and who will see our involvement as making us a legitimate target or we don’t. The reality is that Key is making NZ a target by siding with the Syrian regime who have to date tortured to death tens of thousands of their own civilian population.
Unfortunately NZ now electorally rewards dirty politics and mass surveillance lies, so expect National Party voters to cheer every step towards re-invasion.
All Key is saying, is give war a chance.
Is the PM making sure his son Max is signed up for military training so he can serve in Iraq for his golfing buddy?
John Key crawls to the US with his offer of fresh Kiwi cannon fodder for the Syria/Iraq meat grinder of US construction.
But in a show of false bravado the Prime Minister tries to justify his craven subservience to the US super power.
“Reprisal threat won’t sway PM on terror”
However, just a little change to this Stuff.co headline, and a couple of changes to his following quote, better reflects the truly servile character of our Prime Minister, over a perceived risk to our trading relationship with America.
To illustrate my point, let me paraphrase the Prime Minister’s quote; ‘If you weren’t prepared to do anything solely on the basis of that [increased risk], then you actually start losing your independent foreign policy because by definition you’re saying that the actions of [Americans] will stop you standing up to those [Americans].’
In 2003, with just the barest perceived threat to our trading relationship with the US, John Key delivers a hysterical screaming rant demanding that we go to war.
‘Trade reprisal threat sways John Key’
(Thanks to Travellerev @ A Wider Perspective)
And thus ….from the gates of Mordor………the two faces of Key.
Which bears a striking similarity to that of an underground Misty Mountain
goblin on one side and Gollem on the other side….
A vile and corrupted being……
There is a UN Envoy pleading with the West to intercede to avoid an impending genocide comparable with Rwanda or Serbia.
What is the alternative.
@SANSA
This is simplistic nonsense. Who is the UN envoy you are talking about? Do you have a name or a link?
Can we judge this unknown person’s complicity or impartiality? Do they have links, or not to those with vested interests in this dispute?
And as for the genocide in Rawanda the evidence is that there was deep complicity by French semi-colonial vested interests.
The reason the UN didn’t go in to stop the genocide is that UN forces would have ended up confronting the French army in Rawanda.
While actions of ISIS are certainly appalling and would offend any decent human being, why do we ignore the just as appalling genocide’s committed on behalf of, and by, the Western Imperial powers against the people of the Middle East and the Third World.
The rise of ISIS is a predictable response to the monstrous barbarity committed by the Western powers in invading Iraq.
The Iraq war was not about weapons of mass destruction. (no credible evidence was ever uncovered before or since the invasion)
The Iraq war was not in response to 9/11. (Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11)
The Iraq war was not about combating terrorism. (Al Qaeda were not in Iraq, they are now, and bigger and badder than ever before)
The Iraq war was not about protecting the people of Iraq from a murderous tyrant. (A million civilian dead and 4 million refugees later, counters that argument)
The war in Iraq was about oil, and the West’s need to control its supply and profit from its sale.
The new war will also be about oil.
We have been sent a clear message that we are not wanted there.
If we again enter Iraq, the cycle of revenge and attack and counter attack, barbarity following barbarity will seed further acts of vengence and reprisals until it envelopes not just the whole Middle East but the whole world.
Ask your self this: What on earth for?
What is the mission goal?
What is the end game?
Do we even know what we want to achieve in Iraq and Syria? (other than securing the oil fields)
Is it out of some purile childish wish to punish the bad guys?
Who are the bad guys?
Assad surely, ISIS certainly, Maliki undoubtably, US oil interests definitely.
Best we stay out of this meat grinder.
Comments are closed.