…and focus on our own problems?

No more involvement in the UN, NATO, the EU etc making enemies abroad that we’ll have to fight again one day?

No more foreign aid with all revenue focused on resolving our own problems before helping others?

Not saying I support this view, but there were a lot of strong opinions based on non intervention in one of the recent libyan no fly zone threads that has me thinking that many people may tacitly support an isolationist policy at the moment.

thing is that ‘many’ people will also complete the census saying they are jedi.

where circumstances allow im all for finishing one job before taking on another, but i accept that this is a very complicated jigsaw.

Don’t forget that lots of people work in the armed forces and auxiliary businesses. So wars/interventions are a kind of Keynesian stimulus.

at least with a jigsaw there is a clear goal being worked towards.

are you Swiss?

so this is more like several large jigsaws with lots of important bits missing, all mixed up with the lego and the toy cars, but with all the packaging/pictures already sent for recycling?

so this is more like several large jigsaws with lots of important bits missing, all mixed up with the lego and the toy cars, but with all the packaging/pictures already sent for recycling?

add to that the person in charge of piecing together the jigsaw keeps changing.

And there’s no picture on the jigsaw. And lots of the bits are interchangeable, but not all. And there’s an infinite number of pieces.

I don’t think there is any easy answer to this one.

I do get quite depressed about the the state of the UK. We’ve had such a head start on other parts of the world and yet we find ourselves in such a disappointing position compared to what we could have achieved. However the issues faced by the lowest strata of society in the UK are not even in the same league as those faced by the people of countries supported by foreign aid. I would prefer to think of the plight of humanity rather than adopt a localist viewpoint, compared to huge swathes of the worlds population we a nation of lottery winners and we have a moral duty to try and help out those less fortunate wherever possible.

Military intervention is a different argument entirely and it really depends on individual cases. Stopping a tyrannical leader from waging war on his own people would seem on the surface to be a worthy cause. However the moment the mission starts to whiff of our national interest my support for such actions diminishes considerably. If we are going to act as the world police then it needs to be done even handedly and without thought of national gain. Judging by events during my lifetime this seems an impossible wish.

I do get quite depressed about the the state of the UK. We’ve had such a head start on other parts of the world and yet we find ourselves in such a disappointing position compared to what we could have achieved.

Are you referring to the Empire? Empires come and go, don’t worry about it. Ask the Italians, Austrians, Hungarians, Mongolians, Prussians (who?) Japanese etc etc etc etc.

To be honest I think we have achieved quite a lot. We are one of the most enlightened and sensible on Earth out there I think. Yes we make mistakes, but so do lots of people. We do have a lot of influence in the world not necessarily politically, but historically, if you look hard enough.

yes yes yes, how would WE feel if any middle eastern country did the same to Us?
and it stinks of another Iraq with a different Excuse.

strange how we never did anything about Mugabe or Amin innit, and They did much worse to their peoples

I don’t think we should be backing out of world affairs. However I do question why we are always at the front clamouring to be involved when there is fighting to be done.

With this Libya thing, there are plenty of countries in the UN that could have laid the smack down to Gaddafi without British involvement. Are 2 wars on foreign soil not enough for us?

I suppose the head start i was thinking about was more to do with some of the key points in social history such as the industrial revolution, introduction of social care, universal healthcare and education.

I would have thought that the acquisition of empire made many of these things possible and regardless of where you stand on how these riches were achieved at one point in our not so distant history we were in a position to do great things. It doesn’t feel like we made the most out of that opportunity either at home or abroad.

yes yes yes, how would WE feel if any middle eastern country did the same to Us?

If my govt was bombing the crap out of me and another state intervened to stop it, I’d be bloody thrilled!

MuppetW – all of those things happened across Europe at broadly the same time, in countries that did and didn’t have empires. That’s the nice thing about intellectualism, it tends to be borderless.

Stopping the Mugabe and Gaddaffis and Saddams of this world is a worthy thing, but unless they poke their nose directly into our business, we should leave to to their people to do the job.

Meanwhile we would be able to put poor kids through uni, have our old folks spend their declining years in dignity, and reduce taxation.

we should leave to to their people to do the job.

which really means to be killed by gadaffi doesnt it? It is not like he is holding an election to let them have a say.

Meanwhile we would be able to put poor kids through uni, have our old folks spend their declining years in dignity, and reduce taxation.

we aimed for 0.7% of GDP but w ehabe not achieved this. i am not sure that this reduction in spending will lead to the three claims you make above – perhpas in the Daily mail but not in the real world.
Whilst the first two are noble goals other people in far of lands are dying and starving to death. Getting our house in order is nothing like what is required in the third world where people die for the sake of a few quid [clean water for example] or are left blind for the sake of a £35 op – anyone see comic relief ?

Libya is a rich country, albeit with a government we don’t like.

I’d feel much better about all this if I’d seen our government go into equally bad countries that don’t have oil riches.

Naahhhh … if you want to intervene then by all means intervene with almighty strike. i.e. nuke the place … that will learn them and leave the land to regenerate again for a long time. What’s with all this pussy footing? Plenty of Dear Leaders love war game.

🙄

p/s; we nuke them and they nuke us … everyone is happy and the earth regenerates again.

epicyclo – Member
Libya is a rich country, albeit with a government we don’t like.

I’d feel much better about all this if I’d seen our government go into equally bad countries that don’t have oil riches.

Pretty much nailed it there. North Korea has no oil. Uganda has very little and Yemen, Algeria and Egypt don’t have enough to warrant an attack. Also Yemen and Egypt were pro west.
Thing is, lately Gadaffi was too and he gave a big contract to BP so the West will want a puppet government to continue these oil contracts.
It could really backfire if an Islamist government gets control….

I think it’s hilarious that people actually think they do this out of some altruistic notion…

over the last five years the eu has armed libya to the tune of nearly 1 billion euro, no wonder they are keen to stop him…what exactly did they think he’d do with the weapons..

quite funny in a bill hicks kinda way..

call him what you want but he’s bang on with this one!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk2u-pvOpcc&feature=player_embedded