Tuesday, August 18, 2009

JUST WHAT PART OF UNSCR 1833 DON'T THE SOCIALIST LEFT UNDERSTAND?


The entirely predictable howls of outrage from the Socialist left following the decision by Government to recommit elements of the SAS back into Afghanistan leaves many of us with a sense of deja vu.

At last the chance to relive the glory days of the 60s and early 70s and to indulge once again in the ritual anti-american rhetoric on which they cut their teeth.


And all those fields to conquer yet again; soldiers to spit on, letters to write to wives/partners of servicemen wounded-in-action expressing the wish that they never recover, children to be told by teachers that their soldier father is a murderer. The list goes on ... so much to do, so little time.


Never mind that their poster boy Barak Obama has raised US troop levels in Afghanistan. Never mind that the UK, Canada, Australia and 20+ other countries are involved with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).


And excuse the collective amnesia that it was a Labour/Progressive Government that first sent the SAS into that theatre and were happy to bask in the reflected glory of Willie Apiata's VC.


And just keep repeating the mantra that the New Zealand Defence Force should only be deployed in support of UN mandated operations.


And completely ignore the fact that the ISAF is a mandated UN operation authorised by United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1386 and successive resolutions (the latest of which is UNSCR 1833).


Question ... are the Socialist left intellectually dishonest or just plain thick?

15 comments:

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

both

Simon said...

All we are saying is give Islamic Jihad a chance.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

You beat me to it, FFM

digger said...

Not sure about the "socialist" Left but Pablo over at kiwipolitico has argued in favour of the SAS redeployment in a series of posts dating back to last February, on grounds that include but extend beyond those mentioned here.

Redbaiter said...

Nuke em.

No soldiers should have to die for those primitive bastards.

Anonymous said...

Ditto FFM

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

You can always rely on Red to be decisive.

Psycho Milt said...

Danyl also posted in favour. I haven't posted on it but agree that the reasons in favour of sending them outweigh the reasons against. That doesn't mean though, that there is no valid arguement against sending them or that the people who oppose sending them are dishonest or stupid.

Murray said...

Can we mention that Dear leader Clark put more guys into combat than any other PM since WWII?

Yes I'm counting Viet Nam.

The Veteran said...

For Pyscho Milt .... people who argue against it (the Keith Locke's and John Minto's of this world) are being intellectually dishonest to suggest this is not a UN mandated operation.

But be that as it may my earnest hope is that the military, their wives and children, will never have to suffer the cowardly attacks visited on the families of those that served with honour in Vietnam.

But I fear that for some unreconstructed socialists the temptation may prove too great.

KG said...

Both

emmess said...

The Labour Party are absolutely scum, they totally disgust me
I didn't think they could sink any lower than during the Clark years.
I was wrong

Anonymous said...

Never thought I'd say it, but I'm with Redbaiter on this.

Mrs Danvers

Observer said...

I do think we should be assisting those poor bastards in Afghanistan. Perhaps we could get the curia to open up the Vatican Archives and copy the instructions to the priests who were the front line in the Inquisition, that way they would be able to get their people under control without the necessity of guns and things.

It would be interesting to see how we would react if the League of Arab Nations (an organisation with as much legitimacy as the UN,) were to send troops here to prevent a war between the Maori tribes who didn't sign the Treaty and the rest of us, each claiming dominion over the other.

At some point in world events, we in the west have to realise that our millennium is over and there are others with different mores and cultural norms, and that we have no right to enter their country to sort their thinking out. If one country invades or declares war against another, and the invaded country legitimate leadership asks for help, then the entire 'rest of the world' should leap in and help: Otherwise everyone should stay out of family disputes and let the locals get on with it.

The Realist said...

Phil Goof and his mob are totally disingenuous. Worse, they are out of their depth