Sure, sure, this is a fairly cynical, even potentially repellent, explanation but there could still be some truth to it:
The latest report from the UN independent fact-finding mission on the fall of El Fasher in Sudan reads like a postmortem of a preventable tragedy. The report details what it calls the “hallmarks of genocide”: mass killings, systematic sexual violence and ethnic cleansing targeting non-Arab communities by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
What was done in Sudan is worse than what happened in Gaza. But was Joos doin’ something to Arabs which is, d’ye see, different?
Yes, yes, you’re right, it’s vile racism. But then you’re right, it is vile racism.
mass killings, systematic sexual violence and ethnic cleansing
How much of that has also happened in this country since the Empire Windrush?
That’s possible. The other two things are that a) Sudan is a total shithole and Israel isn’t and b) people using rifles and raping doesn’t make for great news telly like bombs do.
What are the incentives for news people? There’s the costs of getting somewhere, how pleasant it is to stay there, and then there’s how juicy the footage is.
Gaza means you just need a £250 flight on Wizz to Jerusalem, stay at the Hilton with aircon and decent food, generally safe place. Hamas are like tour guides and have the whole thing arranged of showing you what the Joos have done after the event (so it’s pretty safe for journalists).
El Fashir means a 16 hour £750 flight to Sudan, then probably overland to the destination. Probably a shithole hotel. And you’re in the warzone. Footage is at best bodies or you have to get into the people shooting each other.
Also how many people speak English once you get there.
Oh yeah, that’s a good one too.
Ah yes, the classic: Does anyone speak English and been raped.
Well – I have to view it as two bad groups slaughtering each other. It’s highly likely there will need to be increasing restrictions
Placed on Islam going forward with mosque closures and an immigration ban as well as ending Halal slaughter, otherwise we face a growing future fifth column determined to destroy us and utterly impervious to reason. Why should we intervene when different sects of the beast are slaughtering each other?
V_P, spot on. Painful decisions to be made if we are to survive.
And no one can explain to me how islam is really a religion of peace when each different sect of islam (there are 73 of them) thinks every other sect isn’t truly islam and are therefore as fair game for extermination as all us other kafirs.
Splitters, eh?
And HOW could your modern day Kitchener sort out this mess.
Nukes??
Our Establishment has always been Arabist. Kinda made sense when we were dependent on Middle Eastern oil and promoting BP’s interests, and also during the Great Game, but makes much less sense since North Sea Oil, the Wall came down, and the Iran/Iraq war.
Does the Foreign Office all have Lawrence of Arabia syndrome, or Derridan proclivities?
Gertrude Bell Syndrome more like.
It was she who formulated the post Great War Middle East and made the fundamental error of joining the three separate Ottoman provinces of Mesopotamia into the unitary Iraq.
This was the Alexandria School of thought, I think it was called.
I was referring more to buggery, old pal.
Never heard of Gertrude “Peggy” Bell and her mighty strap on ?
🙂
…of goats?
Derrida was said to be quite keen on young Arab anus. It seems that annoyance at this was a prime motivation for Edward Said to write Orientalism. “They’re our young Arab anuses, not yours.”
I don’t think this is it. We used to have a simple thing of owning bits of the Middle East, profiting from oil. And back in Commonwealth days having people picking nuts and pineapples for us.
This is more about the tendency of elites wanting Britain to fix the rest of the world. Like “we should be a leader in green energy”. Or that we should be a home for millions of asylum seekers. Blair decided democracy in the Middle East would be a good thing so lied to the people to get support.
Ukraine is the same sort of thing, and with the same sort of Blairite tendency. “If we don’t help in stopping Putin, he’ll come for us”. Almost certainly nonsense.
WB
Just a quibble.
“Elite” used to mean something…
Using that word for the scum that govern us, or the scum who think they know all and so we should do their bidding, seems kinda contrary to what the word used to mean. Perhaps all it means now is “pretentious scum”….
Fair point. I don’t have a better word, except the top end of the political class.
Ruling Class. If it was good enough for Marx it’s good enough for us, and it has the merit of not being an obfuscating euphemism. It means what it says on the tin. Plain as day.
Ruling Class.
OK!
“If we don’t help in stopping Putin, he’ll come for us”. Almost certainly nonsense.
Of course, Putin is not going to invade Britain any time soon; but Russia is inclined to stretch its frontiers, launch repeated cyber-attacks, aggressively probe the West’s sea and air defences, lead (with China) a military-economic-diplomatic challenge to the West…etc.
But, hey, Russia and China are no threat when compared with the Islamic threat…even though the islamic threat could be solved by removing the incentives for muslims to stay!
Both Russia and China want to see an end to NATO and a breakdown in the European and American relationship.
One way Russia could test European resolve would be to bite off a bit of one of the Baltic states, perhaps where there is a Russian speaking community, and then challenge us to do something. This could even be in conjunction with China really ramping up the pressure on Taiwan to test America’s resolve.
Europe and the USA are breaking down anyway. Not because of Russia or China, but that the Americans who fought in WW2, or were raised in the shadow of it, and supported Pax Americana are being replaced by a generation that came later, were not scarred by it and don’t see the point of it.
Memories can really screw with rational thought. Trump thinks of Americans making Ford Mustangs as the golden age. Putin thinks of being in Dresden as the golden age. Our rail network is probably about men that were once boys playing with train sets.
When Putin dies, he’ll probably be replaced by someone who was still in short trousers when the wall came down and doesn’t think in terms of that being the golden age.
“Of course, Putin is not going to invade Britain any time soon; but Russia is inclined to stretch its frontiers, launch repeated cyber-attacks, aggressively probe the West’s sea and air defences, lead (with China) a military-economic-diplomatic challenge to the West…etc.”
The probing of sea defences started after we started giving arms to Ukraine. NLAWs kill Russians, we can expect Russia to start killing the people supplying the NLAWs. Or at least, trying to fuck with us.
The man’s a bastard, but why does he want to piss Britain off? What’s the cui bono of that?
“Does the Foreign Office all have Lawrence of Arabia syndrome, or Derridan proclivities?”
Lawrence would probably do for both
Separate from UN? What does ‘UN independent’ mean?
And ‘fact-finding?’ You must be joking.
Guardian has some fantasy idea of what the UN is.
I think it’s supposed to be read as “done by UN people, so it’s independent of any given country’s point of view.”
Which is complete cr*p of course. UN people definitely have a point of view, and it’s inimical to civilization.
The few photos I’ve seen of the contending parties don’t suggest that either side is predominantly “Arab”. Or if they are they must be the world’s darkest Arabs.
Yeah. That incorrect conflating of Muslim with Arabs is rather common isn’t it? Maybe we should stop referring to them as ragheads. It’s only a minority are tea-towelled.
Given the correlation of observed behaviour in those afflicted with Moohamedanism despite different backgrounds / ethnicities, its almost as if its a “mind virus”
It’s not a virus Nessimmersion, they are all following the same instruction manual.
Not that any of our ‘leaders’ will ever acknowledge that fact though, as to do so would allegedly ‘demonise a vulnerable minority’.
Churchills’ appeasers and crocodiles come to mind.
It’s just the moral relativism of the liberal left consensus.