In just one and a half years, the coalition has wanted to use the military to "keep the peace" during the riots, has employed them to man immigration queues at airports when the unions were on strike and wants them to police the Olympics and other large events.
And this week, the government has floated the idea of privatising parts of the military.
It's because of the cuts, don't you know. Or for "security", of course.
Is May acclimatising us to being 'policed' by the military? Do she and the other freaking politicians temporarily in charge of our democracy realise what they're doing? If so, why are they doing it? If not, why why are the cretins still in charge?
The police, under the Peel doctrine, are there to keep the peace and to investigate criminal activity. The military are trained to kill, acting under martial law where civilians have no rights at all. Not even, it seems, those 'protected' under the Geneva Convention, as various sham inquiries have shown in recent years.
The US constitution is very clear about not allowing the army to 'police' civilians - for damned good reason: it inevitably leads to abuse of power and/or military dictatorship. Our military industrial complex* is far too powerful as it is.
We can assume that the coming depression will see mass unrest; heaven help us if government uses the military to quell it.
During Egypt's uprising, the corporate media was obsessed - nay, awed - by the apparent friendliness of the military towards the protestors. But after Libya's regime change, the military weren't quite so friendly, were they?
If we refuse to learn from history, can we please, at least, learn from events of the past year? Please?
---
* Isn't is peculiar that our most profitable products - financial derivatives and military equipment - are weapons of mass destruction which we deploy ceaselessly?
Related:
- Information and power - EU defense policy - Ian Parker-Joseph (hat tip: Mr Witterings)
- The Article 36 Committee - Ian Parker-Joseph
.bmp){kind=small}
15 comments:
XX heaven help us if government uses the military to quell it.XX
Because the police are doing such a FINE job....right?
If the police are unfit for purpose, SOMEONE has to keep discipline. Who better than the military?
FT, the police were told to stand down during the riots. One has to wonder why. Most people thought this very strange indeed. However, it was never explained.
I think we're being played.
Incidentally, the police, in similar circumstances in the US, recently, were told to stand down, rather than quell the riots.
Perhaps there is some international agreement on this - finding ways to bring the military into civilian life.
Na, ja. Don't forget WHY the Berliner Reichstag was burned down.
Indeed, FT.
Have linked to this Fausty - and hopefully answered your questions....
Thank you Mr W. 2010 was a dry blogging year for me - hence missing out on IPJ's excellent posts.
"Have you noticed how militarised the UK is becoming?"
And as if by magic, the military are being drafted onto the streets of London to counter a potential threat from terrorists.
APL, it is to counter a hypothetical threat rather than a potential one.
Fausty, thanks as always for the link.
Thank you Fausty lass, for the link.
APL - what Ian said.
Ian and Mr W - You're both very welcome.
It's good to see you back to full strength, Fausty, and giving it both barrels ;)
Sorry, forgot to say, don't forget abt the Lisbon Treaty and the sanctioning of the death penalty in case of riots or insurrection - and immunity for government forces.
Thank you GV. Great point. If you have any particular article over at your place you'd like me to link to within, I'd be delighted.
Take anything you think might be useful x
Thanks GV. A veritable treasure trove!
Post a Comment