Should GB be a world power

If you read my post properly you will see that I was agreeing with another posters remark about the naivety of some people on this thread. I don't think that I need permission from anyone to agree a former comment. You seem to be so emphatic about what the factions in the ME should be doing. I merely enquired as to how they could be persuaded to get to the position of discourse, as opposed to fighting. A perfectly valid question I would have thought.

nigglienellie can't you reply to a post without insulting others (e.g. calling them naive) or being sarcastic?

No, I don't have a plan or know who to contact. That's the role of intelligence officers and diplomats. Given many of the local groups/countries are being supported by the international coalition, it shouldn't be too hard to identify who should be part of any such coalition. I will say again that everybody understands each faction or country has its own agenda. The challenge at this point is to get them working together to defeat ISIL. What happens after that is a challenge for the future.

After the first World War and the fall of the Ottoman empire, the new borders in the Middle East were drawn up by Europeans without much knowledge of the region’s people, geography and customs. This caused many of the ongoing conflicts in the region. Many of the brutal dictatorships that lasted for decades have now fallen, so maybe we're approaching the time when the region’s more 'natural' nations to emerge.

Yes my previous post may look naive but I believe it will happen one day, though not before a lot more suffering and violence, unfortunately. There is nothing like a common enemy to bring people together, be it a crazy group of people, catastrophic natural or man made disasters, or perhaps visitors from another planet!
How stupid the west was to not share its intelligence about ISIS with Russia, what harm could it have done? Recently I heard on the BBC that the Jihadis are now moving around with the general population for safety. Also that they are trying to obtain chemical and nuclear weapons. It is only a matter of time before they or some other group does so.
I do think Britain still has some greatness, but it is on the way out. We have some amazing people serving in the forces and behind the scenes, a pity that the ones in power are mostly self serving idiots and that too many of the upcoming generation are not receiving the sort of education/training to maintain the standards of capability and responsibility that our generation had and passed on to our children. You only have to try calling a govt office, helpline etc to see what the immediate future holds.
Power has always gone in cycles, empires have been and gone, but with globalisation and the Internet, and our total economic interdependence, it may be that over the next 50-100 years instead of a new world power rising up there will be a global levelling out of poverty, wealth and influence as we realise that our security depends on the security of the rest of the world. That may sound like more naivety but many scientists, philosophers and humanitarians are beginning to have faith in the future.

There will be no police funding cuts this next year.

Yes, well done Margaret for sharing your views with us.

There has already been cuts in police spending

As I understand it Police funding hasn't been cut?!

So I think Margaret has answered your question, Anniebach?
Is anybody surprised at her reply? I can't imagine it chimes with the pacifist sympathies you were expressing when you talked of the "bring our troops home" soundbites.
Well done Margaret's sons and well done Margaret, you can be rightly proud of them!

I don't think I suggested bombing the whole of the Middle East?!!! I said that the ME is running rings round the West which indeed it is! As for saying that a coalition of countries in the M E must be done. I agree, but saying it is the easy bit. How exactly would you do this?-who can you trust?!! If you have a plan please tell us!

On the original vampirequeenquestion should we be a world police power, I have heard a great deal from those in the know that persuades me that we haven't even got an effective local police force. I fear the last round of police cuts has fatally injured our local police who just cannot respond to community crime incidents leaving residents with no long term option but to defend themselves along the lines of what they do in the USA. So, no, if we can't defend our own residents in our own country we should not attempt to behave as if we could sort out other countries problems. That's not to say we should not care about them, if ordinary folk are in dire straits we should try to help them in any way we can.

On the second point about defence, I believe we have to retain a first strike capability to keep the looney tunes in their place although the nuclear option is bleeding resources and cannot ever be used. We are still a world power, the 5th wealthiest, and we excel in so many fields of human endeavour.

Your last paragraph is both shocking and cynical. . I can't believe anyone would think like that.

Excellent post Margaret. I have nothing by admiration and gratitude for the mean and women (and their families) who keep our country safe.

I would add though that I would like to think the days of putting those men and women in unnecessarily danger are long gone. I'm not sure that's the case though and I'm talking as much about being adequately supplied with the correct equipment, etc. Also, Hitler and the Nazis were a clear target, ISIL is not.

nigglynellie I can only assume you didn't read my post properly. If I am naive, then you are closed minded. We all know each faction has it's own agenda. That's why I said any coalition of local groups and ME countries it's not an easy thing to. But it must be done if we are to beat ISIL and avoid more people becoming radicalised because of foreign forces fighting in their country. Or perhaps you think a bomb them all approach is the only approach?

Why is David Cameron still not saying the sources of ISIL's financing is part of his proposal?

I am not against military action. I am against military action without clear aims and objectives. It is not enough to say we want to help defeat ISIL.

But to bring in another aspect. The West makes money from rebuilding the infrastructure of countries reduced to rubble by conflict. Is one of the reasons for expanding air strike to make sure we get a bite of that huge cherry?

So nigglenellie , you think we should bomb most of the middle East not just Syria?

MargaretinNorthants

Thank you for such a succinct , common sense personal post.

With your permission I would like to align my thoughts with yours as your words chime so well with mine.

Fantastic post Margaret, it says it all. As you say rose, that naivety that is being posted on here is breathtaking!!! If we lived in a perfect world, of course all parties would sit down and work out a common solution, but sadly we don't, and we can't! All factions in the Middle East have their own agenda and no doubt will use our incomprehension to further their own ends. DH worked in the M.E for some years and let's just say that their way of doing business was very different to ours! You thought you had a deal, and it could easily turn out that you didn't!!! Quite frankly the west is having rings run round them, much to the delight of IS and most of the M.E!

GIve not a world power. As said in a previous comment we just follow the USA lead.

And Trident is a complete waste of money. Especially after reading an artical yesterday that they can be open to hacking. Also, as the upgrade will not be ready until 2030 immaterial to what is happen today.

Great post, Margaret!

against.....sorry

I had one son in the first Gulf war, in the Falklands, in Belize and both he and his brother were sent to NI in the troubles, one in plain clothes so as not to be recognised as he was in intelligence. Did I worry............of course, especially as I had only a matter of months before lost their father. But......they were grown men, they chose their career, they loved it and were happy. I was and still am, though they are in their 50's now, immensly proud of them. I think the British people try to do what is right, without wondering what the rest of the world thinks. As for the days of the British empire, yes the British made horrendous mistakes, but so too in history did Rome, Turkey, France, Portugal, Spain......we were not the only ones...........we are only human. But we also, and this is often forgotten, did a great deal of good. The Commonwealth countries for the most part are ex-colonies............if we were as bad as all that they would have wanted no close ties with us. I believe the UK foreign aid budget is still the highest in the world, but please correct me if I am wrong. As for ISIL, what would have happened if we had stood by and let Hitler run riot over all of us? Please don't forget that for a year Great Britain stood alone agaist him, and many many people from the "colonies" that we had done such wrong to, came here and fought with us. Hitler tried to exterminate all the Jews, the gypsies, amd other ethnic minorities he considered undesireable. ISIL is slaughtering anyone who does not suscribe to their view of what being a muslim is. I really don't see too much difference.
As for being a World power, yes I think we are, we may not have the greatest number of men in the forces, so America outnumbers us there......but one son once remarked to me that it took 8 American personnel to do what 2 Brits did! He should know he was in the Gulf at the time. There is a saying, "she be small but she be mighty"......Thats Britain.
Margaret

Cheerytree

'Why make ourselves stand out as a target on home soil? because as sure as night follows day we will be if we start joining in as a big player.

We ARE a target on home soil, we have been for years. We have been told 7 potential terror attacks have been foiled this year. We have been fortunate that our security agencies have foiled them but it will happen AGAIN on our home soil .

'DJ

'We are too small a power to need nuclear weapons. France has nuclear weapons . That did not stop it being attacked and they will not use them despite the provocation'

We are not too small a power with regard to military / intelligence led defence. Yes France has nuclear weapons but for goodness sake it would not use them to attack IS in Iraq and Syria just to have revenge. That is ridiculous. If IS held territory EVER obtained nuclear weapons, say IRAN. then it would have no qualms in using it.

The only possible reason it would not is the thought that they would in turn be attacked by the same type of weapon. That is why it Trident is classed as a nuclear detterent. If every country in the world gave up nuclear weapons and every country in the world was honest and never made nuclear weapons for the next thousand years then yes , get rid of nuclear weapons. But whilst there is not a chance of this happening then

Not joining in to help other countries already involved in the fight against ISIS would not do anything to help foil attacks by home grown terrorists, simply show them them how weak we have become on this issue and may even up the attacks here as a result.

it's either laugh or cry at some if the naivety going on here.

Get rid of the EU, we are one world now

We cant even agree on gransnet.

Collectively agree on each country's borders where there are disputes so that no country has to try and defend them or feel threatened

That has not happened in the history of all mankind.

Sorry if this has been said, but I don't want to read 6 pages of comments:
We are not a world power, no country is any more. Our hope for the future lies in collective decision making by consultation with other countries. Remove the veto at the UN which blocks lots of good initiatives. Collectively agree on each country's borders where there are disputes so that no country has to try and defend them or feel threatened. Have open trading. Get rid of nearly all the weapons - because they filter down into poor countries and into the hands of terrorists. Have an Internationsl police force like NATO was that has access to trained and armed, moral, forces from all countries to put down any aggressor.
Get rid of the EU, we are one world now. Reinvigorate the UN and its agencies, they do a lot of good but they also do some silly things and waste money. Then concentrate on education, health, development and saving the environment world wide. It is possible, we have amazing technology to do all this, it would save money, we just need the will.

It's not ISIL we would try to engage with in any solution. It's all the many local groups already fighting against ISIL and Assad. There needs to be a coalition of those groups.

The only 'good' solution to this conflict is for the people from the countries involved to fight against ISIL and Assad. The international coalition should support these groups in what ever way works.

- That includes getting them round a table to develop a strategic approach to the fighting.

- It includes training and arming these groups to make them effective. This is already happening, but it lacks the necessary co-ordination.

- It includes the sharing of intelligence information.

- And it could include air strikes by the coalition.

This is not an easy way forward because just like the coalition countries, these groups have conflicting objectives. That's why it's called a diplomatic solution. The international coalition should be enabling the countries involved in the conflict to work towards self determination.

Any approach needs to avoid fuelling the fires of radicalism. Taking part in air strikes on Syria because other countries are doing it is not an intelligent choice.