Mike Meredith

Snow In The South, Travel Chaos, Whingers Out In Force

Feb 022009

Today (and probably tomorrow) the South of England has been subjected to the heaviest snow-fall for 18 years or so. As can be expected for such an unusual weather event (the Met office dragged out it’s rarely used “extreme” warning), anyone travelling this morning found things more than a little tricky.

As usual the whingers are also out in force claiming that we should have prepared better and comparing us to countries that are more used to extreme weather. They have a point: if we were to spend huge amounts of money to prepare for events that happen once every 20 years we could cope better.

And some of the whingers need to take note that some of the preparations need to be made by them; motorists in countries with more extreme weather make some of the preparations themselves. So many of the whingers share in responsibility for the lack of preparation.

But does it really matter that much ?

Oh businesses will complain, but what does it really harm the world if we take a day off ? At least those who live any distance from work. In many cases people can work from home which reduces the risk for those who really have to get in (and not just because their medieval bosses do not trust them to get something done).

The real answer is to lighten up and enjoy the different weather – it may be cold, but at least it is bright too!

Businesses Running To The Government In The Depression

General, Politics No Responses »

Jan 292009

When the economy is well, we constantly hear from businesses about how government should not interfere with business; that anything the private sector does is sacred, and the public sector is at best pathetic. They complain the most about regulation but government support for problematic businesses frequently comes up to. And of course whinge constantly about taxation on business.

Of course any business that needs support from the government to survive is pathetic and probably should fail.

But wait! Come this recession, we are seeing speaking heads from businesses in droves demanding that the government bail their business out. Somehow because there is a recession on, all the traditional rules can be ignored and businesses need support from government.

Sure perhaps we do need to use public money to help out businesses that would otherwise fail. After all reverting to 19th century economics like the Conservatives seems to have done is likely to be far worse. But that does not mean they should get a free ride – we should remind them that businesses usually ask to be left alone, and that goes two ways.

And of course put up taxes on businesses a tad, to pay back the money over the long term. And every time a business complains about high taxes, remind them of these times when government was spending money to help businesses out.

NI: “Compensation” For The Families Hit In The Troubles

Politics No Responses »

Jan 282009

Today the conflict in Northern Ireland has appeared in the news again. Fortunately this time the conflict was no more than angry words, but it shows that the “troubles” are not quite over yet. The news that sparked this conflict? The announcement that all the families who lost a member during the troubles would receive £12,000 as some sort of gesture (they avoid the word “compensation”).

The problem with this is that this package includes those families who lost a member who was a terrorist “killed in action” as it were – for example the family of an IRA bomber killed by his own bomb would receive this gesture. It is hardly surprising that this is somewhat less than those who feel they are genuine victims of terrorism.

Those who came up with this idea need to have their heads examined. Perhaps their hearts were in the right place, but they should have known that this proposal would never have been popular. The family of that IRA bomber mentioned earlier (and the equivalent families of Unionist terrorists) are victims of terrorism as much as the other families, although I very much doubt I would get much agreement from the other families.

Why?

First of all the family of a terrorist is not responsible for the actions of the terrorist, and they will suffer the normal effects of grief when that terrorist is killed. In a society where that terrorist did not feel the need to go out and murder people to make a point, the family would still have that member of their family.

Does it sound like I am blaming society for turning ordinary angry young men (and women) into terrorists ? Yes to an extent.

A normal healthy society does not turn a significant number of angry young men into terrorists. They may well go on protests, throw bricks through windows, and generally make a nuisance of themselves. They will not go out and plant bombs, and shoot people.

Any society that does turn a significant number of angry young men into terrorists is sick in some way.

That does not mean that the terrorist is innocent of the crimes they commit – anyone who bombs, or shoots in an attempt to achieve a political end is in the wrong.

But any society that is sick needs a tonic.

Israel and Hamas Share Reponsibility For Civilian Casualties

General, Politics No Responses »

Jan 172009

On a side matter, who the hell came up with this mealy-mouthed “collateral damage” phrase anyway ? Let us call a spade a spade and stop hiding an ugly truth behind a pretty phrase. It is “civilian casualties”.

Who is responsible for the civilian casualties in the current mess in the Gaza strip ? I should point out that I’m talking about the Winter 2009 mess seeing as there have been so many in the past and will probably be again.

Well Israel’s mealy-mouthed spokescritters will have you believe that it is all the fault of Hamas for fighting amongst civilians and stock-piling weapons amongst civilians, etc. There’s an element of truth to that, although one wonders whether if Israel were reduced in size to a territory the size of the Gaza Strip, would not their own army do pretty much the same thing ? Or at least the Zionist lunatic fringe.

But Hamas does not deserve all of the blame. Israel gets some too. Whether or not Israel is justified in using military force in trying to stop Hamas from attacking Israel, those dead cilivians in Gaza were killed by Israeli bombs, Israeli shells, and Israeli bullets. Israel has to bear the responsibility of those deaths and not just blame Hamas for them.

To claim otherwise is an insult to everyone’s intelligence and further damages Israel’s credibility. And Israel needs to spend a lot of time repairing their credibility. There are many ordinary people in Europe who are more likely to believe claims made by Hamas than claims made by Israel because of the lies and half-truths that Israel has told in the past.

There are many weapons used to fight terrorism. One of the most important is truth. One of the least important is military might.

Israeli Use Of White Phosphorous Munitions

General, Politics No Responses »

Jan 162009

So various organisations claim that Israel is using white phosphorous munitions in Gaza, and Israel denies their use. Or to be more specific denies the use of “WP” which is military slang for white phosphorous munitions intended for uses other than smoke (i.e. set things burning which might not otherwise burn – like people).

But Israel is using white phosphorous munitions; tell-tale pictures of shell casing designed for use as smoke screens have been released, and they have admitted using smoke screens. This makes their denial of white phosphorous (or more specifically “WP”) considerably foolish.

Whilst a nit-picker could claim their denial is in fact true, their denial relies on people understanding the difference between “WP” munitions and smoke-screen munitions. It would be far better to say that their use of white phosphorous is compatible with the various laws of war (the Geneva conventions, etc.).

But is it ? A spokesperson for Israel is hardly in the position to know. They may well know there is a policy to only use white phosphorous smoke screens in areas where civilians may be, and they may not be used to target civilians, but they do not know that Israeli armed forces have stuck to those policies. It is easy to imagine that some artillery unit has noticed that their smoke screen shells when “accidentally” fired too low are quite effective at setting fire to things and to carry on having “accidents” without letting their senior commanders know.

Even if that is not happening, and Israel is sticking to the letter of the laws of war, they may not be sticking to the spirit of the laws of war. The use of white phosphorous munitions in cvilian areas is banned to prevent horrific injuries to civilians; the use of smoke-screen weapons in civilian areas that may cause such injuries sounds like it should also be forbidden.

White phosphorous is a terror weapon in much the same vein as chemical weapons … it is not classified as a chemical weapon because armed forces find the smoke screen effect so useful. It is worth pointing out that one of the first uses of white phosphorous was by a terrorist organisation in the 19th Century (the Fenians).

Older Entries Newer Entries