Theoretically, in a few weeks from now, we could be about to witness a War of the Worlds. We could all be waiting to see which dictator can press their special red, nuclear spaceweapon buttons first. Ok, Blair and Bush may not be seen as the traditional (evil) dictators, but they both stand shoulder to shoulder, Blair unquestionally going along with what ever hair brain idea Bush comes up with, making for a very scary, volatile planet. We are not livin in the milk'n'cookies, all-for-one-and-one-for-all, Land of the Free Bush so often likes to try and convince us of. We don’t have enough good education on world matters and their reprocussions. People aren’t able to fully appreciate what is going on in this apparent democracy, and propaganda isn’t just limited to Iraq. Land of the free, my arse.
The guys from Massive Attack agree with what I'm saying. They've started a "Stop the War" campaign, alongside the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND for short, a global network to eliminate nuclear weapons. ). Damon Albarn and Elbow have also had stuff to say about this recently.
So, what are they campaining for and how will anything be acheived? For the CND, it's the following aims...
CHANGE Government policies to bring about the elimination of British nuclear weapons as a major contribution to global abolition.
STIMULATE wide public debate on the need for alternatives both to the nuclear cycle and to military attempts to resolve conflict.
EMPOWER people to engage actively in the political process and to work for a nuclear-free and peaceful future.
CO-OPERATE with other groups in the UK and internationally to ensure the development of greater mutual security
And they hope to do this without violence or anarchy. This is where the bands come in. Bands have big fanbases, who look up to and respect the bands their fans of. Bands can say stuff in interviews and the media will happily go away and write a story about it (see also: this article). Things have been said like...
"The pressure needs to be put on Tony Blair, people have to realize innocent people are dying in their name. He needs to know he won't be elected again if he keeps doing this." - Elbow lead singer Guy Garvey to Reuters.
"There has to be public debate about this. We need a democratic discussion about the rights and wrongs of going to war." - Damon Albarn to the NME
We'd like anyone reading, especially bands who have a pedestal to use-wisely, to take this onboard, take some time to read more in the papers, more on the CND website and say, do, change something, before it's too late and we're all suffering cancers from nuclear fallout, avoiding rain on certain days or worse, dead. This is not just about wanting to live, this is about not wanting to kill other humans. And what's it all really about, land? Where you go when you die?

DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
this…now, i think is a totally worthwhile campaign. i think now it’s probably best to concede that it won’t achieve it’s aim because there are too many powers that be who will regard it as irrelevant. but i think with enough support at least major governments will be aware of it, and definitely think twice before they do anything stupid.
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
dont drop dropping the bomb
Re: dont drop dropping the bomb
Re: dont drop dropping the bomb
Re: dont drop dropping the bomb
Yeah....good morning Vietnam... and they would have as much success in getting The Horrible but Highly Intelligent Saddam as they did with The Horrible but Highly Intelligent Bin Laden - Zero. So shitloads of innocent Iraqis die for...nothing.
In '85 there was a real threat of nuclear war, and we were all shitting ourselves at regular intervals. This is NOTHING like that. If anyone really believes that Saddam Hussein is trying to take over the world then I feel deeply sorry for them and would heartily recommend therapy.
He knows damn well that if he ever used a weapon of mass destruction on any Western connected country Iraq would be vaporised. If he tried anything like that on Israel, Iraq would be vaporised. Saddam craves power, but any such move woould remove power from him, not strengthen him.
DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
Good on ya Seaney Baby!
Lets face it, Bush wants Saddams Oil just like his father, like they really gave a shit about kuwait!
and you can forget all this "axis of evil shit"
Im not saying saddam hussain is a fucking angel, but if he tried to tell america who should run their country and to tell him about there weapons, and then even attacked them he would be called a "terrorist" so if Bush does it, how is that different!
I reckon we get fed a lot of shit!
........
anyways now thata off my chest, whats for tea tonight!
DON'T DROP THE BOMB?
1) leave them alone. result? Hussain builds a fucking huge nuclear weapon and points it at Israel
2) trade sanctions. result? doesn't hurt Hussain at all and simply starves many innocent Iraq citizens
3) Invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussain allowing millions of people a chance of a better future despite limited inevitable civilian casualties
options for bands regarding international action against Iraq:
1) take too many drugs to care
2) campaign against it in a desperate attempt to keep your utterly redundant act in the music press and struggling because you've not made any music in about 5 years and no-one gives a stuff about you anymore
options for young people regarding international action against Iraq:
1) have a considered thought-out sensible opinion
2) be a fucking student who opposes it because, like, war is bad, maaaaan and having absolutely no alternative suggestions of your own because you're too stoned and your naive ill-informed left-wing politics stinks of fashion statements and trying to shock your Labour voting parents.
Re: DON'T DROP DA BOMB?
One things for sure. When you all work for insurance companies and drive big estate cars, I'll be waving my flag with as much gusto as I do now.
So there.
Re: DON'T DROP DA BOMB?
Re: DON'T DROP DA BOMB?
DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
Complete ignorance seems to be given away in the first line. There is very little chance that anything will happen for months, probably even years.
The image of Blair being Bush's poodle is too rather flawed and mostly media induced. It may well be a very important priority for Blair staying on the right side of Bush and America (and rightly so) but his biggest priority by far is too win elections. Since he is no doubt aware of the statistic mentioned he will not run blindly into something.
A public debate is already occuring do Massive Attack never watch the telly or read a paper other than the Sun? Out of interest do any of these people have any interest in educating their fans to both the faults and benefits of nuclear weapons. I somehow feel not, which will probably lead to some more dumb twats spouting left wing shite they dont understand but sounds pretty cool.
And anyway if we and America and some other people suddenly threw away our nuclear weapons would Mr Sadam suddenly stop trying to make them or would it just make it clear that he could actually get away with using his own?
oh and don't Massive Attack have an album coming out soon? cough cough
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
As I have already said the main benefit of nuclear weapons in my mind is for peace keeping. As for 'corporate welfare state' (not suprised by such a sensatialist phrase coming from chomsky) it is a fact that weapons and such are fantastic for economies, which is nice as it gives lazy people jobs keeping them off the real welfare state. And if these weapons never get used it dilutes the moral problems somewhat.
now if only that stupid Diana bitch hadn't stopped all those lovely profitable landmines
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
We really do seem to have an unhealthy quota of New Labour apparatchiks on this board.
Nuclear weapons *did* keep an uneasy peace during the Cold War because of MAD (mutually assured destruction), but there is only one superpower in the world now. Iraq, despite the hype, doesn't have that big a nuclear capability. See what Scott Ritter, an American and former UN weapons inspector said a couple of months back for verification of this.
I'd give it until a couple of weeks after September 11th until it all kicks off. I hope I'm wrong and that you're right and that there is at least time to sort this out without killing more Iraqi's than the US has aready killed in the last decade, but I fear not....
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
As for our involvement it sounds like it will at least have to be debated and voted on in the house of commons and since the majority of the Labour party and Lib Dems appear to be against action then it will take them a couple of weeks at the best to threaten to sack the lot of 'em unless they vote with the executive.
I should think it will also take quite a while for the UN to give them permission, if they were to attack without permission then that really is pretty awful.
I have no idea wether Iraq have any weapons unlike this Mr Scott Ritter chap. But since weapon inspectors appear to have little idea themselves and many have opposing views I would not take his opinion as fact.
As for the "unhealthy quota of New Labour apparatchiks" I would certainly not consider myself to be one of them. All I seem to have objected to is the fools that instantly take a left wing position on any matter without understanding any of the arguements. Additionally myself and BANGMAN seem to be the only people who are saying anything slightly different to the masses.
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
Who needs permission to do anything in a land of freedom? "Democracy and Freedom" - does that not make sense to anyone? Be ruled and be free cus you are ruled?
heheh
Re: heheh
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
But having reconsidered this, it seems silly to debate the fate of millions of Iraqis when there are so many webzine editors apparently living in absolute poverty. Maybe the bloke from Miss Black America could start a campaign.
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
And whose opinion would you take as fact? MPs? As you pointed out, Blair's only interested in power, not what would be beneficial to the people of Iraq. And when it comes to it, the majority of Labour MPs would be for any strike, as would all Tory MPs..and a handful of Liberal MPs. They'll simply give Iraq a crumby deadline like they did in the Gulf War and then wade in.
As for the UN giving the US permission. They didn't need permission to go and bomb Afghanistan, they won't seek it this time.
Have you any idea how many nuclear weapons Britain has? Or where they are?Does Iraq? Or how many the US has? Or where they are?
Husein is, without doubt a crank. But that doesn't make Bush a beacon of sanity.
You're calling people ignorant left-wing fools, whilst spouting neo-liberal crap your yourself, in my opinion.
But I may be wrong, of course...
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
And whose opinion would you take as fact? MPs? As you pointed out, Blair's only interested in power, not what would be beneficial to the people of Iraq. And when it comes to it, the majority of Labour MPs would be for any strike, as would all Tory MPs..and a handful of Liberal MPs. They'll simply give Iraq a crumby deadline like they did in the Gulf War and then wade in.
As for the UN giving the US permission. They didn't need permission to go and bomb Afghanistan, they won't seek it this time.
Have you any idea how many nuclear weapons Britain has? Or where they are?Does Iraq? Or how many the US has? Or where they are?
Husein is, without doubt a crank. But that doesn't make Bush a beacon of sanity.
You're calling people ignorant left-wing fools, whilst spouting neo-liberal crap your yourself, in my opinion.
But I may be wrong, of course...
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
I will continue to disagree with you other the amount of support in the Commons.
There is quite a fundamental difference between this proposed war and that attacks on Afghanistan in that the latter was pretty popular, at the moment the voices against attacking Iraq appear to be greater. (politicians and general public I mean, not shite past it musicians)
I have no idea how many nuclear weapons Britain has or anyone else, nor do I particularly care.
Not quite sure what I have said that is neo-liberal. I would actually class myself as fairly left wing in any case, my arguement was not with you, you do not appear to be at all that ignorant. It is with those that will blindly shout out anti-war crap just because Massive Attack or Damon fecking Albarn say so or just because it's quite trendy to do so.
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
I also agree that pop stars, with the exception of a select few (The Housemartins, The Redskins to name a couple from the past) should stop spouting off when the they feel like it just to get their mugs in the papers. Damon Albarn, I agre, becomes even more odious when he does his 'yeah man, save the fuckin' world' routine. He is, by definition so far up his own arse that no-one should listen to a word he sings...never mind says.
Two things we agree on!! Shall we marry?
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
(and he's way less odious than Paul Heaton.) There will always be people who are right into their left/right/centre politics, but surely an issue becomes important when it brings people who are usually politically silent into the debate. It's the percentage swings in opinion in the non-committed masses that influence modern market research led politics, and the boy from Blur has a big voice there, where it matters.
With respects to this 'debate', I wonder why people expend energy slagging off the way other people express their opinions, or try to claim that other peoples opinions should be somehow invalid because they're 'New Labour'. It's a bit like an army beating the shit out of each other in an argument about how best to attack their enemy....pointless.
Re: DON'T DROP THE BOMB!
As for Albarn having a big voice - of course you're right - but that doesn't make him any better any informed or any less ignorant than you or I. He disappeared up his own arsehole many moons ago. The infamous Brass Eye episode showed 'celebrities' up for what they are - ignorant chancers who care only about their career - in the main at least.
And I'm sorry Chris, but Paul Heaton may be a sad old lush now, but he was pretty inspirational when he was in The Housemartins! To me at least...but maybe that says more about me than PH...oh dear...
As for people's views being invalid because they're New Labour - well the same applies with certain people here saying 'oh you're trying to be left wing'. I may be alone here, but you're either left wing or you're not. You don't try to be. Personally, I'd take it as a compliment.....
Massive Attack
I am right and you are all wrong
Here are a few points to think about:
1) Let's not pretend the forthcoming war on Iraq has anything to do with disarming Saddam. It is, as always, about oil, about money, and about US influence in the Middle East. Pakistan's President Musharraf is a dictator who acutally possesses the nuclear bomb (and has said he would use it in a pre-emptive strike) and who actively sponsors terrorists (in Kashmir). He's not on the hit list. Why? Because the US can lean on him for influence in Asia, and because he isn't sitting on countless barrels of oil.
2) Why now? The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is at its most violent level since the early Eighties. An attack on an Arab nation at this time would only add to tensions in the region. Israel would use the distraction as an opportunity to kill even more Paletstinians, as they did during the Afghan war. Bad feeling towards America amongst would only be increased by a seemingly unprovoked attack, breeding yet another generation of terrorists.
3) Isn't America's number one priority supposed to be a war against Islamic terrorists? For all his faults, Saddam is a secular leader, and he is by no means a favourite of al-Quaida and co. True, he gives money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. But if that's the basis for attacking a state that sponsors terrorism, Saudi Arabia and Syria - both of whose governments pour vast amounts of money into terrorist organisations - should be bombed first.