I have two different theories about what's going on here.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) March 9, 2022
Theory A: This is a deliberate neocon policy shift driven by Alyn Smith, Stewart McDonald, and their ideological godfather David Leask.
Theory B: It's thoughtless, reckless virtue-signalling.https://t.co/hdS253dRBb
My piece yesterday about Nicola Sturgeon's jaw-droppingly irresponsible suggestion that NATO should "consider" entering into direct military conflict with Russia via a no-fly zone triggered a predictably angry reaction from SNP leadership loyalists - but what was really interesting was the angle they took. There were two approaches they could have taken in supporting Ms Sturgeon's words - a) they could have doubled down on her behalf and insisted that NATO military intervention might well prove to be desirable, or b) they could have pretended that she didn't say what we all heard her say. For the most part (although by no means exclusively) they plumped for the latter option, which in a way is quite reassuring. It's intellectually dishonest, but it at least suggests that a significant chunk of the SNP's support base continues to regard what Ms Sturgeon was suggesting as unthinkable, and that she'd be crossing a red line if she persevered with it.
The section of Ms Sturgeon's remarks that several people pretended to misunderstand was this: "But on the other hand, Putin is not acting in any way rationally or defensively, and you know, we have a situation right now where perhaps the only thing nuclear weapons are deterring is the ability to properly and directly help Ukraine." The reimagined version of these words is that Ms Sturgeon was suggesting that Putin's nuclear deterrent was so effective that we must under no circumstances set up a no-fly zone. In reality, she was plainly saying the polar opposite of that - she meant that Mr Putin's actions were so immoral that we should disregard (or "consider" disregarding) the nuclear threat and set up a no-fly zone to "properly and directly help Ukraine". If you look closely, it's almost as if she perversely thinks Putin's malevolence somehow blunts the deadliness of his nuclear weapons and means that the only effect they have is to erect a psychological barrier to providing assistance to a country under attack.
Nuclear deterrence, as a concept, does not work like that. It pays no heed to the moral rectitude of the person or country that possesses the nuclear arsenal. The proponents of Britain's nuclear deterrent do not for one moment argue that it is our (dubious) benevolence and virtue that makes the weapon so 'effective' - but rather our amoral determination to obliterate the entire civilian population of our enemies if we are facing defeat. Jo Swinson, leader of the Liberal Democrats as recently as 2019, famously had no hesitation in saying that she would press the nuclear button, thus instantly incinerating untold millions of innocent men, women and children, while leaving untold more millions of innocent men, women and children to die slowly in the weeks thereafter from radiation sickness, horrific burns and starvation. From the expression on her face, she said this with a degree of levity and with a lightness in her heart. There are many variants of "liberalism" and "democracy", but this appeared to be a particularly exotic one. President Putin would be entirely comfortable with it.
Just under a decade ago, I wrote a column for the International Business Times arguing that nuclear weapons were "humanity's greatest problem" and that our long-term survival depended on eliminating them completely. I remember feeling slightly embarrassed when I submitted the column, as if any editor that read it would think I was stuck in a Cold War time-warp. But that is exactly what is so dangerous - we've been caught in a trance for the last thirty years, imagining that it's perfectly fine to have thousands upon thousands of nuclear weapons sloshing around, enough to wipe out our species dozens of times over, simply because NATO no longer faces a communist bloc in eastern Europe. (In many ways that's comparable to the current bizarre trance we've slipped into about "the pandemic being over" even though 5% of the entire population are currently walking around with an active infection.) The reality is that it was always the weapons themselves that were the problem, not ideological competition between communism and capitalism.
If there's any silver lining to come out of the current crisis, it's the education of a new generation about the nuclear threat, and the wake-up call to older generations that the potential for nuclear annihilation outlasted the Cold War. Hopefully the penny will now drop that if we retain these weapons, nuclear 'close calls' will continue happening periodically, just as they did between the 1950s and 1990s. In each 'close call', there might be only a 1% or 5% chance of escalation to full-scale war, but eventually the law of averages will inevitably catch up with us and human civilisation will perish - perhaps due to a catastrophic strategic miscalculation such as the one proposed by Ms Sturgeon yesterday. The only way to avoid that fate is global nuclear disarmament. And, yes, that will be a formidable task for as long as Putin is in power - but we have to understand that we cannot ever "win a nuclear war" against him, and that arming ourselves to the teeth with more and more nukes is the opposite of a solution.
* * *
According to the Politico 'scoop', one reason for Blackford's departure if it happens would be that his troops think he's been too SOFT on Joanna Cherry, you know by 'just' sacking her rather than withdrawing the whip. It's like stepping into bloody Narnia.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) March 10, 2022
Stewart McDonald and Alyn Smith, the two most unsuitable replacements for Blackford in the entire SNP parliamentary group, are naturally touted as his most likely successors.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) March 10, 2022
A neocon SNP group leader, combined with the withdrawal of the whip from Ms Cherry, would obviously be a calamity for the independence cause, although the silver lining would be that it's hard to think of a more effective recruiting sergeant for the Alba Party.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) March 10, 2022
On a more positive note, Blackford's departure could yet be a good thing if he's replaced by someone like Philippa Whitford or even Tommy Sheppard. (Joanna Cherry presumably has no chance due to some people's irrational hatred of her.)
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) March 10, 2022
* * *
Via the Scot Goes Pop polling fundraiser for 2021-22, which I set up in the autumn and is part-funded.
If you prefer to donate directly, that can be done via Paypal or bank transfer:
My Paypal email address is: jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk
Or email me for my bank details. (My contact email address is different from my Paypal address, and can be found in the sidebar of the desktop version of the site, or on my Twitter profile.)
Good article James.
ReplyDeleteThe world missed a huge opportunity to get rid of all nuclear weapons when the Soviet Union collapsed and China was a lot weaker.
ReplyDeleteLet's hope Sue Gray isn't working on the new plan for the U.K. taking in Ukrainian refugees or even any future Ukrainian/Russia peace plan.
ReplyDeleteWhere is your partygate report?
Blowhard Blackford blows back and says it's all pish that he is resigning as Westminster SNP leader. That makes a change it's normally him talking pish.
ReplyDeleteYou are quite correct, we, as a species, really should disarm all nuclear weapons, however the reality is we missed the nearest thing we had to an opportunity after the collapse of the Soviet Union. I'm not even sure that it would have realistically have been possible then.
ReplyDeleteSince Putin came to power, all prospect of that was lost, and the West has been far too slow to realise the growing dangers, enthralled as it was with the prospect of making even more money, and getting snared in the spider's web of dirty money from Russian oligarchs.
Now we find ourselves in the situation where nuclear weapons are no longer a deterrent, but are being used as an indirect threat. 'I will invade Ukraine and you'd better let me get away with it or I'll nuke you' being Moscow's message.
I suspect the outcome will be that Ukraine will be left to fight its own battles, albeit with the help of western weapons, and that a new Iron Curtain will descend along the borders of the Nato countries.
Just to bring readers up to date with the latest thinking of our favourite commentator and winter sports enthusiast:
ReplyDelete"Suffice to say that when it comes to voting intention, I tend towards those candidates/parties/bloggers/commenters etc who don’t e.g. warn me about the grave danger ‘unisex’ toilets – such as found on aircraft/trains/buses, in small businesses and family homes – apparently pose to my wife and daughter.
Aye, the problem for trolls is that if someone is British first and foremost, no matter how hard they try, they can’t pretend to be (pro-indy) Scottish. It’s like me attempting to pass myself off as Spanish or something. I can only be what I actually am (Scottish of part Irish heritage); any attempt otherwise is just going to be a caricature, so a dead giveaway."
I have nothing to add. It's perfect in its own way and suitable for preservation in the Skier Museum.
DeleteThe guy is unbelievable! When he was on here he used to claim Alba were obsessed with toilets while providing us with regular updates on the latest unisex one he had visited and on one marvelous occasion describing men who used urinals as 'weird'😂😂😂.
As for his nationality, he switches it as often as he switches careers. I've asked him before how he can claim to be Irish when he doesn't live there, the same basis he uses for claiming Stu Campbell isn't Scottish.
The fact that the Duggers can't see through his nonsense probably explains why the Covid Queen finds them so easy to fool.
Today, the 10th March, is the deadline for the Chief Constable and Lord Advocate to inform the court if they are going to defend Mark Hirsts claim against them or admit to another malicious prosecution in Sturgeons Scotland and stump up taxpayers money to Hirst to compensate him for the dreadful ordeal that some nasty people put him through. Some of the same nasty people involved in persecuting Salmond raised this complaint against Hirst which was subsequently thrown out of court.
ReplyDeleteWe will find out soon if the case is proceeding but it means either:
1. An admission of guilt and more taxpayers money wasted by the same crowd of people who have already wasted a lot of taxpayers money, or
2. Another court case which may shed more light on the actions of those involved - unfortunately for Sandy Brindley of Rape Crisis Scotland she is not protected by anonyminity like the alphabetties whose fingerprints are all over this malicious prosecution. Will there be more lies under oath in court?
REFERENDUM 2023
ReplyDeleteThis is the title of Mr Kavanagh's latest article designed to keep the WGD numpties believing. Some of my comments:
1. 1st paragraph he says: " It is nice to be able to report that the Scottish government's plan to hold a second independence referendum towards the end of next year remains on track."
Where is this plan and where is it on track? What has been done to date to keep it on track?
2. 2nd paragraph Mr Kavanagh quotes Sturgeon as follows:" We, right now, should be reminded , above all else , how lucky we are to live in a free democracy where we can put forward our case for political constitutional change , argue that case passionately, whatever our views on that might be, and trust people to decide."
Of course total nonsense by Sturgeon. How come you got told to pissof when requesting a sec 30 and the Britnats have been saying you ain't getting a referendum for 40 years. The truth is that Sturgeon and Mr Kavanagh are gaslighting the WGD numpties and the people of Scotland. There has NEVER been a proper democracy in Scotland only the type of democracy you get in colonies. If you read that quote by Sturgeon it tells you she admires the UK. An independence leader 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.
3.3rd paragraph he says: " ...... the First Minister's statement is a welcome confirmation that an independence referendum will indeed go ahead in the latter half of 2023." More nonsense from Mr Kavanagh. It is just a politicians promise nothing more. A confirmation would be a date in law. Not a promise from someone who has a track record of not keeping promises on the subject. For someone who not that long ago expressed the view that Sturgeon should quietly slip away once Covid is over Mr Kavanagh does seem to now place a lot of trust in her promises. What could have changed his mind?
I'm just going to emphasis that comment from Sturgeon in paragraph 2.
DeleteSTURGEON IS SAYING WE ARE LUCKY TO BE LIVING IN THE UK!!!!!!!
and people think this is the right person to be arguing for Scottish independence in a referendum. Really? This is the same person who said the BBC is a key and valued institution. Most independence supporters hate the BBC but not Sturgeon.
Sturgeon will never deliver independence because she doesn't want to.
The Irish/Scottish/ French Walter Mitty Skier thinks its some great shakes that Mike Russell SNP President, who once promoted the idea that the NHS should be privatised, is attending the AUOB march in Arbroath in April. Personally, I would be more than happy if he did no such thing.
ReplyDeleteSkier goes on to suggest that people have lied to him that SNP politicians do not attend these marches. Now Skier being such a complete diddy would know that SNP politicians have always attended these marches if he actually attended any of them or just read reports on the marches or watched Independence Live's coverage . Sturgeon, on the other hand has NOT attended an independent MARCH since 2014. Gay pride march no problem for Sturgeon.
Now as Skier has claimed in the past to have attended marches then it is the mad liar Skier who is lying again.
If you ask me the wee liar has gone off her trolly. Maybe she thinks this warmongering will get her in with the EU. But the EU, like NATO is now on a shoogly peg.
ReplyDeleteIn case there is any doubt, I agree that the war in Ukraine is in fact a huge war crime, which like all wars involves immense human suffering. The perpetrators of this crime are only peripherally in Moscow though - the main perpetrators are in Brussels and Washington. Russia before it all happened asked them for a security treaty, which would have avoided the war. It was refused, for no good reason. NATO is supposed to be there to provide security for Europe - has marching up to the borders of Russia given us security? The fact is that NATO has proven itself to be incompetent, and by causing this war, criminally so.
Similarly the EU - also criminally incompetent. They have stupidly bowed to US pressure to tell their major companies to disinvest from Russia. The result is that these assets are being sold at a huge loss, and are now being snapped up by US investment businesses for pennies. Because of US enforced sanctions (which the US are not participating in to anything like the same extent) the prices of gas and oil for Europe are going through the roof. As one commentator said “The US defeats Germany for the third time in 100 [or so] years”, (although it’s the whole of Europe which has been defeated - the previously burgeoning trade with China, which was threatening US economic input to Europe, will dwindle away, as we are now securely under the US thumb).