Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile AT: Gate of Ivory, Gate of Horn Previous Previous Next Next
The puerility never ceases - Wemyss's Appalling Hobby:
From the Party Guilty of Committing 'Gate of Ivory, Gate of Horn'
The puerility never ceases

I do realise that the sort of people who’ve suddenly discovered the existence of Jos Kony do in fact believe that, if they have hitherto been in a state of nescience, then surely everyone else has been equally ignorant.

Balls. Some of us do, actually, keep up with world events over, oh, the past quarter of a century or so.

The latest bien-pensant rallying-cry is, ‘He remains at large because he is INVISIBLE to the world. FEW know his name, even FEWER know his crimes. WE ARE MAKING HIM FAMOUS! Because when he is, the world will unite against him and demand his arrest!’

On the one hand … bless. On the other … balls.

He’s ‘at large’ despite being under ICC indictment – which itself was dilatory due to the opposition of the sort of governments commonly praised by the same lot now demanding Something Be Done – not because intelligent and well-informed people Didn’t Know or governments Didn’t Realise, but because he has a very large armed mob behind him and because even those with the most reason to wish him ill (e.g., the AU and its OAH predecessor) throw an eppy when it’s suggested that Something Be Done in the only effective way of doing it by the only actors with the power to do it. (Remember Geo W Bush? He designated the bugger a terrorist and provided US support for the Ugandan forces to go after the sod. Now, just imagine which of the Usual Suspects had the vapours over that, and coming from that source.)

The ‘world’ has already in some sense demanded his arrest. But even those who are now loudly willing the end are in a muddle over the means. You want the bugger in the dock (or, as I should prefer, in a box)? ‘Demanding his arrest’ is puerile. The Old Bill aren’t who you want. The Paras, the SAS, 1 RIFLES, a few companies of Jocks from the Royal Regiment of Scotland, and the Brigade of Gurkhas are what you want. (If we can have a few Aussie commandos and some secondments from PPCLI, even better.)

And dear Christ, you’d most of you rather die than admit that.

My dear friend – and Friend – muuranker linked to a Cold War survey, also today, by coincidence: which was equally instructive, in a mournful sort of way. She is not of course responsible for my responses, which are italicised.

Welcome to Phase Two of the Cold War survey. In this exercise we are exploring personal attitudes towards the Cold War. The range of questions covers a number of themes, please use the free text boxes to type your answers. Remember this is not a test so any response is a valid response.

  • For over 40 years sucessive [sic] British Governments spent millions of pounds building 'nuclear bunkers' around the country. What was the purpose of these structures?
  • National command structure survivability. What a silly question.
  • The development of an independent nuclear deterrent was promoted by successive Governments as essential to maintaining the British way of life. How successful was the deterrent in your view?
  • Eminently, as witness that we are discussing it freely, and not in American English any more than in Russian.
  • The Cold War dominated four decades of British life; in that time a vast defence orientated manufacturing industry developed. Many communities relied heavily on the defence industries for work. Do you think reliance on such industries perpetuated the Cold War? *
  • No. The sodding Soviets perpetuated the Cold War, full stop.
  • Did you or your family play any part in the Cold War? And if so could you describe what the activity was? *
  • We're traditionally a Service family, and, additionally, my uncle was a civil servant during the period. To that extent, we were as involved as every British subject was, but no more so, really.
  • Some scholars suggest it is too soon to investigate the Cold War. Others think we should be protecting sites now as they force us to confront the period both personally and nationally. What do you think?
  • No legitimate historian ever says 'it's too soon to study' something; it may well be too soon to reach quite all the eventual conclusions. Equally, this candy-floss language w/r/t 'confronting the period' sounds like redbrick socialist balls to me.
  • The Cold War is a relatively new subject to schools. Do you think we should a) teach it in a worldwide context; b) concentrate on the British story; c) not at all? Please give some context to your answer.
  • It can hardly be taught without context. Concentration upon the British context seems necessarily obvious. Mind, if the usual leftish idiots are to teach it in the state schools, it might be best to give it a miss altogether.
  • Have you any other thoughts on the subject?
  • Yes, but they are far too broad for a survey. I shall no doubt write another book.

There really are moments when the smug stupidity endemic in certain quarters boggles, or buggers, the mind.

Tags: , , , , ,

10 comments or Leave a comment
blamebrampton From: blamebrampton Date: March 7th, 2012 10:03 pm (UTC) (Link)
I think that quite a lot of the left supports military action where appropriate. For recent examples, see the broad support for the action in Afghanistan as opposed to that in Iraq, the calls for faster and more comprehensive action in the Balkans and the unmet cries for intervention in Rwanda.

Yes there will always be some who oppose any military intervention, just as some other people are Rush Limbaugh. Neither should be read as representative of the whole.
wemyss From: wemyss Date: March 8th, 2012 04:04 pm (UTC) (Link)

It's Lent.

I had a response of some 450 words. Instead, I content myself with noting that we do not, O Socrates, agree, not least on the definition of when and by whom action is appropriate.
femmequixotic From: femmequixotic Date: March 7th, 2012 10:56 pm (UTC) (Link)
The thing is, this recent viral interest in Kony is done by the non-profit Invisible Children which has been working for seven years to raise international awareness of the situation in Uganda. It's not their first campaign to do so--it's just the most viral one.

From what I understand, they try to target teenagers and young adults in most of their campaigns, hoping to start a youth movement. This one seems to be working quite well in that regard; I've seen several of my second cousins (all of whom are younger than 18) asking questions about Kony on Facebook and having actual discussions that are raising their awareness. So yeah, I've known about Kony for years, but my sixteen-year-old cousin Austin hasn't, and I'm glad to see him talking about this, glad to see him outraged, glad to see him wanting to do something to stop it. Yes, I roll my eyes a bit at the language, but if that's what it takes, okay. At least people are listening.

And dear Christ, you’d most of you rather die than admit that.

Er. *blinks* Really? Most of the left-leaning people I know wouldn't blink an eye at appropriate military action. I definitely wouldn't. I'm in no way anti-military. I'm just anti-stupid military, particularly given what I know my brother went through in Iraq. Twice. :/ As for that bastard Kony, if some Navy Seals wanted to go in and take him out, I'd throw them a tickertape parade. Although I do think there are obviously some major social justice issues in Uganda that need to be taken care of. Frankly, Kony's a symptom of a deeper problem.
wemyss From: wemyss Date: March 8th, 2012 04:09 pm (UTC) (Link)

It's Lent (see above).

Unless these yoofs are being asked to enlist and do the actual work, I content myself with wondering what in buggery, other than a warm feeling, the purpose of 'raising awareness' and the rest of that candy-fluff balls actually is.

I also, Lent notwithstanding, find it interesting that, had Kony named his armed mob, oh, Fighters in the Way of God, or God's Army, and done so in Arabic (mujahidden, jundallah), a goodly number of those exercised by his atrocities should not dare to utter a discouraging word.
taradiane From: taradiane Date: March 8th, 2012 03:35 am (UTC) (Link)
redbrick socialist balls

I love you.
wemyss From: wemyss Date: March 8th, 2012 04:09 pm (UTC) (Link)

And contrariwise.

We are a select few.
muuranker From: muuranker Date: March 8th, 2012 08:28 am (UTC) (Link)
Some of your answers were like mine, others completely different. Although not necessarily opposed, just with different emphasis or reading of the question. I do like to push such surveys out beyond the small ring of already-interested.

Sadly, I don't think the first question is silly - I suspect that the earlier research showed (or at least implied) that some respondents were not clear about the purpose of the bunkers (perhaps they thought they were nuclear-powered? or got them confused with nuclear missile silos?)

wemyss From: wemyss Date: March 8th, 2012 04:10 pm (UTC) (Link)

That explanation...

... is more terrifying than anything I had conceived.
From: tree_and_leaf Date: March 8th, 2012 01:59 pm (UTC) (Link)
is a relatively new subject to schools

Oh, surely not. I distinctly remember it being an option for Higher History, and I think also Standard Grade, when I did it, and that's fifteen years ago now, and it wasn't new on the syllabus then.

(Although, admittedly, that's new relative to Magna Carta or the Great Reform Act).
wemyss From: wemyss Date: March 8th, 2012 04:11 pm (UTC) (Link)

I am too old to know.

And what goes on in state schools is an enduring mystery to me, in any case.
10 comments or Leave a comment