Sunday, 8 September 2013

Not a spent matchstick but a developing challenge

Wouldn't  it be nice I thought on this lovely ‘Sunny Sunday Morning’ if only I had awoke to the musical sound of really happy people, the sound of laughter, the sound of children playing safely in the street or better still the park nearby.

Do I have a very vivid (powerful feelings,strong and clear images in the mind) imagination, and If I said; it would have been nice to have heard people sing, the church bells ring out the good news of today. And then it dawned on me, wake up, wake up lad, the worlds not like that. For all my daydreaming, its just wanting something better for everyone I do suppose, and of course; as opposed to what we actually have. It’s a horrible fact that hits me everyday like a wet fish slapped in my face; that we the majority have nothing, and what we do have, the minority are taking it away on a massive scale and world wide. Austerity, the weapon of working class distribution and dealing, destruction and control that ‘rico shades’ from upon one countries walls to the next, and when people take to the streets in dissent because they amongst other things hold or express opinions that are at a variance with the minority, they, and we are beaten back, and have we not all seen, been witness to a state, a country one after the other use the police, the military, the courts, country after another comrades, and around the world.

Many more people today must question what their governments really stand for, who do they stand for, whose interests do they really represent and once more I say, more than ever before. More people than ever must know or harbour such mistrust, thought or feeling and particularly to a higher degree in regard to possible wars, no longer are the likes and views of Tony Blair taken seriously by working people, he cuts a sad figure these days, a bitter and twisted man is his reality, but one thing I can say for sure and that is he will never be seen as Labour’s greatest leader, for what little that's left of the Labour Party will never afforded him that, but still he will be cushioned by his millions, and as he becomes more poisoned, still stalking a bird like a wild cat, a real danger in the world.

The next two days may prove to be the most testing, nail biting days that the peace loving world may have to endure as the American establishment and Barack Obama’ play war games on earth, and it would not in the least surprise me if Tony Blair is dreaming at night of a million bombs dropping out of the sky and onto the innocent people of Syria; it is always the innocent that hurt the most in times of wars, I was reminded of that when a few weeks ago I learnt about a man I’d never heard of before, he was the wartime leader Winston Churchill's nemesis and an inescapable critic of the bombing raids that killed thousands of innocent people in Germany. George Kennedy Allen Bell (4 February 1883 – 3 October 1958) was an Anglican theologian, Dean of Canterbury, Bishop of Chichester, member of the House of Lords and a pioneer of the Ecumenical Movement.

He did a lot then?

George Bell told it as it was by all accounts. He quite rightly questioned, and I must say with others, the wisdom in bombing the cities of the so-called enemy, cities like Hamburg whose population always strongly when they had the chance voted against the Nazi Party and Hitler time after time, and yet they still got bombed. During World War II Bell repeatedly condemned the Allied practice of area bombing. As a member of the House of Lords, he was a consistent  parliamentary critic of area bombing along with Richard Stokes and Alfred Salter, Labour Party Members of Parliament in the House of Commons.

In November 1939 he published an article stating that the Church in wartime should not hesitate "... to condemn the infliction of reprisals, or the bombing of civilian populations, by the military forces of its own nation. It should set itself against the propaganda of lies and hatred. It should be ready to encourage the resumption of friendly relations with the enemy nation. It should set its face against any war of extermination or enslavement, and any measures directly aimed to destroy the morale of a population."   

At one time Bell was seen as a leading possibility to succeed the then Archbishop of Canterbury, however Bell had upset Churchill so much so, with his criticism of the war and with articles that appeared in the press like a letter to The Times,in which he called the bombing of unarmed women and children "barbarian".  

I don’t know what I’m trying to say about Bell here, only that today any bombing of unarmed women and children is in Syria or anywhere is still “barbarian”. Barack Obama, is off his trolley to put it simply, this was the man that said he would bring in change and hope, that he would move in a direction to end a war, instead he’s been more trigger happy than his predecessor. A military strike and possible war with Syria will be different and will have different consequences compared to any other American military intervention under any other president; it is the first time that the finger on the trigger is that of a black man.

Globally, the Obama presidency was supposed to usher in a new era of a more responsible use of American power in the world and be more supportive of multilateral co-operation. After all, Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on the basis of hope and promised change.

Now look what we have is a crazed warmongering president. But with memories of Iraq fresh in the minds of many, the war has been greeted with scepticism, including by some US allies and friends at home as well as persons in President Obama's own party. Further, some believe the attacks (chemical) could have been perpetrated by some of the nasty elements in the amalgam of Syrian opposition forces, especially as the tide of the conflict had reportedly been turned towards the regime, this is a very important point. The New York Times reported that Obama's "core supporters, especially African-Americans and members of the Democratic party's liberal wing who voted repeatedly against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are expressing the deepest reservations."

If the last two years of Syria's bloody civil war is anything to go by, there will be some kind of military response to United States bombing; and the conflict could be widened to other countries, adding to the death and destruction in a region that has seen too much war. So following President Obama's return from Europe, the White House is making an all-out effort to win, and as the president faces opposition within his own party, and the president hasn't won over liberal activist groups, either. The Associated Press reported late on Saturday that has spent "in the mid-five figures" to air a TV commercial urging Congress to oppose airstrikes against Syria. The 30-second ad, titled "Not Again," says the U.S. didn't set out to spend eight years at war in Iraq and a decade in Afghanistan and predicts the same thing will happen if Congress approves Obama's desired military action in Syria. The next few days can make or break the rush to war, and now, most of the hard work will be down to our comrades and friends all over the US to win the arguments and put the case against, we must learn to lend our support to the developing challenge that now confronts us more than ever - this is the time to put that time old question, and it’s not a spent matchstick to say there are better ways than making wars. 


No comments:

The Socialist Way

Blog Archive