h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Whilst there is a EU trade embargo with Burma - it fails to prevent goods manufactured 'under license' finding their way their - for example Land-Rover defenders manufactured in Turkey making their way to Burma, or the afore-mentioned helicopters via India.

There is also non-military equipment that can be made into military equipment quite easily.

Basically I think it's because it suits our politicos to pretend we are still some sort of world power when in fact we are a middle ranking nation on the fringe of Europe. I would imagine with the current stretch and drop in recruiting Iraq and Afghanistan are probably our last pitch.

Just a minute - why not use our totally pointless nuclear deterent to nuke Burma. A tad extreme but it makes as much sense as the usual claptrap that our politicians spout.

Why not boycott France if boycotting China is seen as an option? Total and Unocal have the greatest foreign stake in supporting the junta.

"This isn't our problem. We are not the conscience of the world. Why is it whenever some tinpot socialist dictator comes to the attention of the bleeding hearts, the cry goes out "We've got to do something". Why us? Why not Venezuela or Denmark or Egypt?"

1) It is our problem. At least by any measure of common decency - would you ignore it if you saw someone being beaten up in the street? Same moral standards apply believe it or not.

2) The Burmese junta isn't "socialist". Believe it or not very few dictatorships are these days. I can only think of Cuba, Vietnam, Laos and China. Mugabe thinks he is but he crossed over into nationalist ethnic-strongman years ago (a la Milosevich)

3) Why not us? As you've said before we have clout. Venezuela has none (and Chavez has a dodgy appreciation for dictators anyway), Denmark is too militarily and economically weak, Egypt is hardly a perfect democracy and has lacks military and economic capability.

"Basically I think it's because it suits our politicos to pretend we are still some sort of world power when in fact we are a middle ranking nation on the fringe of Europe."

Rubbish. One of the worlds strongest economies, second-largest navy, one of the world's most high-tech and professional armies. And we're hardly on the "fringes of Europe", we're one of the big players along with France, Germany and Italy.

And in case you didn't know we've sorted out a country's problems before. Remember Sierra Leone? Remember the West Side Boys milita?

"Whilst there is a EU trade embargo with Burma - it fails to prevent goods manufactured 'under license' finding their way their - for example Land-Rover defenders manufactured in Turkey making their way to Burma, or the afore-mentioned helicopters via India."

The trade embargo is a farce. It hurts the Burmese citizenry and doesn't seem to prevent the junta beating people up and retaining its power. The Americans have suggested "personal sanctions" against the junta and their families. I think that might be an idea although I think they'll circumvent it.

I think India's attitude to Burma is shameful. They're one of the closest things the Junta has to a supporter and with them being a major regional power and a democracy to boot they need to take a look at themselves.

"I stickler isn't it. People flick flack on the whole intervention things all the time don't they? I know I do, andf it annoys the hell out of me.

It seems are personal predjudices about the country in question and the relative stances of the UK and US governments determine our opinions more than anything on this one."

I don't think we have to "intervene" much here. The junta is being put under renewed pressure and there's an opportunity for the international community to increase that themselves and take the opportunity to hurt the Burmese government. They've been getting away with this nonsense for ages and the world largely despises them but nothing concrete ever gets done. The Burmese junta is a classic self-perpetuating dictatorship. It's not strictly-speaking ideological. It doesn't want to create a worker's paradise or enforce conservative values in the face of radical pressures. It simply wants to stay in power for its own sake and it's become surprisingly good at it.

The Burmese Junta isn't socialist? Really?

"Strongman Premier Ne Win, driving pell-mell along his "Burmese road to Socialism," has nationalized all small businesses, banks and warehouses, denied trading licenses to aliens, and prohibited non-Burmese from taking government jobs. Ne Win's edicts struck particularly hard at the Indians, who have become the nation's sharpest shopkeepers, but have been reluctant to take out Burmese citizenship.

As a result, many Indian merchants are now serving as $1-a-day clerks in the shops they once owned, and find themselves constantly being reprimanded by Burmese overseers."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,875949,00.html

Venezuala, Denmark & Egypt were picked at random. It could have been any country. The point is whenever anyone, anywhere in the 3rd world gets a cough, the cry goes up that WE have to supply the medicine, usually in the form of our own kids stopping bullets. Enough already. Sod this acting unilaterally - we get brickbats from all sides. Whine to the UN. Screw this sending billions to basket case countries which merely act as a resting place for cash before it winds up in a Swiss bank account anyway.

We've got patients leaving hospital suffering from malnutrition in this country. We've got countless thouands homeless. We've got the most disadvantaged people in our own society denied dental care. We've got rising numbers of kids leaving school functionally illiterate. We've got sick people being denied drugs because of cost. All this, yet we've got one of the highest tax burdens in the world!

You wanna whine? Whine to this lot :

Union of Myanmar Embassy/High Commission/Consulate For United Kingdom
Embassy Street Address :
19A, Charles St
London
W1J 5DX
Phone : (44-2) 7629 6966, 4486, 7499 8841
Fax : (44-2) 7629 4169
Email : [email protected]

"Basically I think it's because it suits our politicos to pretend we are still some sort of world power when in fact we are a middle ranking nation on the fringe of Europe."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federations_by_military_expenditures

Look I know it ias wiki so sory.....

But remember, we buy everything military from those crooks at BAE, so we pay at least five times what it's worth. Then we need to buy three of everything 'cos the first two won't work.

>>Why us? Why not Venezuela or Denmark or Egypt?<<

Because the UK helped to create the current situation in Burma. We have a responsibility to help them.

The UK is also one of the very few countries in the world with the clout to be able to negotiate with China on equal terms. We also enjoy a privileged relationship with India.

We shouldn't be going it alone - we should get support from our allies in Europe and North America. Not just the US: Canada has a long tradition of involvement in similar issues and the Chinese are becoming increasingly interested in the Albertan oil-sands. However we should be in the vanguard - one of the first to call for action.

SWL, the reason the call often comes for the UK to sort things out is because of the legacy of the Empire. The UK was responsible for governing a lot of the world not that long ago and should bear some responsibility for problems that arise. I'm not one of these people who suffers guilt for the sins of the empire, but it did cause some pretty situations to develop, and as a nation we should take the lead in trying to fix them.

We aren't alone in this - France is a good comparison. They have troops and aid going to Chad and the CAR to prevent the Darfur conflict from spreading, they have troops in Cote d'Ivoire helping maintain a truce after the civil war there, they defended Chad and Mali when Gaddafi was getting expansionist, they helped Senegal (one of West Africa's few stable and successful states) in its troubles with the Gambia and Mauritania. While they have also caused disasters (Gabon, Rwanda and Algeria all spring to mind) they are consistently involved, because they have a responsibility that comes from the colonial legacy.

If you're looking for ways to save money so we can teach our kids to read, give our sick drugs and house our homeless then look no further than our military. We don't need it at anything like its current strength or size. With its economic clout and shared history with much of the planet we should be a colossus of soft power, not trying to pretend we can still play with the big boys militarily.

There's a final reason we should help - because we can. And, like I said, the world doesn't get many chances for a win like this.

Isn't there a contradiction there? We have a responsibility to police the world because we used to own it but you want the military cut?

>>Isn't there a contradiction there? We have a responsibility to police the world because we used to own it but you want the military cut?<<

Not particularly. We don't need military to police the world, we can use our money. That's what Japan does, and it does it well.

Japan is also a good example of how a small force can be lavished with funds and exquisitely trained and supplied, enough for self-defence and some peacekeeping, and still use only a tiny proportion of GDP

I also said we should be supported by our allies - if troops need to be sent in, let other countries do send them, we can pick up part of the bill or provide technical and logistical support and experience.

The most obvious cost savings would come from cancelling the Trident replacement. I am a nuclear fan when it comes to power generation but I cannot for the life of me see how or here we would use Trident. And I've argued before that I do not think we could use it without the approval of Uncle Sam.

We can use our money? I can see two ways of using money to influence another country. Either you withold it through sanctions or you bribe the country with it. We're already imposing sanctions to little or no effect, so would you now countenance bribing the Junta?

As for getting other countries to do the dirty work and put their kids in harms way - Like Germany in Afghanistan who won't go out at night? Or the French who won't venture out of the capital?

Last time I was in Ireland, I was reading a headline story about the Irish "leading" a multinational UN force into some banana republic in Africa. The Irish were sending 4 men. Out of a force of 20,000. Is that the level of commitment you see as appropriate for the UK?

<>

As Zagreb pointed out, that isn't socialism. It's nationalism. It's specifically aimed at sectors with a lot of foreign businesses. The usul label for this sort of government is fascist (albeit a loose usage).

Noggin

So why does the government there have a stated policy of the "Burmese road to socialism"?

But isn't 'national socialism' another term for 'fascism'?

Ahh, I see SWL, if the Burmese govt says it's true, it must be so.

"The Burmese Junta isn't socialist? Really?"

No. The measures you describe aren't about levelling society or about more equality. Loathsome as they are, socialist dictatorships tend to implement policies based around some sort of leftwing worldview. The Burmese junta doesn't do that and what it calls its policies is neither here nor there. The Burmese junta does things to increase its own power and weaken anything that threatens it. It doesn't have an ideology beyond keeping itself in power. To be "socialist" it would have to be pursuing some sort of ideology.