!!

Guests can now post!

Welcome to Intelligent Answers.  As a guest, you are now able to post a question, subject to getting through our spam-bot filters.  However, if you want to answer any questions, you will need to register.  Thanks for visting!  (BTW - guests cannot post links, and if you post spam, we will block your IP and report you to every spam protection site we can find - we work hard to keep this site spam free for the benefit and enjoyment of our members!)

Author Topic: Am I being too cynical?  (Read 1792 times)

Wumpus

  • Guest
Am I being too cynical?
« on: 21 February, 2010, 10:23:25 AM »

I fully accept that I may be a little jaded by cynicism about the motivations and actions of our own government.

The scenario:

We have a government which badly needs a massive injection of popularity on the run-up to a general election.
If they don't get it they face being kicked out of power, possibly for generations.
Peter Snow's swingometer is not just going to twitch a bit; the potential is there for it to knock New Labour sideways.

It's well documented that defending the Falklands led to a big surge of popularity for Mrs. Thatcher in the 80s.
Arguably it won her the 1983 general election.

We have the recent precedent of going to war with another country based on an overstated/fictitious threat to our national safety.
We're still involved in 2 wars justified by threats from nations which didn't actually pose any direct risk to us whatsoever.

Falklands Mk2. would grab big headlines, and distract attention from Iraq and Afghanistan.
A quick victory would easily lead to a huge wave of national pride just as it did last time.
People would rapidly forget that Gordon put their bank details into the public domain; that the politicians were all fiddling their expenses; that the UK faces having its credit status downgraded; that we owe a trillion quid to the world bank; that our armed forces are already becoming overstretched; that we all face massive cuts in services whoever comes to power.

Is Gordon Brown cynical enough to promote/threaten/start another Falklands war in order to improve his own chances in an election?


Offline Hiheels

  • Founder member, in the naughty corner for smoking in the café.
  • Founder
  • Chancellor
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 123
  • -Receive: 82
  • Posts: 5060
  • Helpfulness: 677
  • Yes, yes, very nice. Now put it away.
Re: Am I being too cynical?
« Reply #1 on: 21 February, 2010, 12:17:30 PM »
Not too cynical at all in my opinion.

Those with their noses in a trough will do just about anything to remain there and there are enough of them to 'lose' the people who start it - in other words make it untraceable while they all cover for each other.
But if there does happen to be a scapegoat, well, so long as it's not one of them, what the heck...David Kelly anyone?


Just going to pop this over in to Speaker's Corner and hope the debate rages.

Offline P-Kasso2

  • Awaiting inspiration.
  • PK unique
  • University Councillor
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 54
  • -Receive: 164
  • Posts: 12278
  • Helpfulness: 214
  • January 2011 prize-quiz winner.
Re: Am I being too cynical?
« Reply #2 on: 21 February, 2010, 02:00:36 PM »
Cynical is just a form of being realistic.

Don't forget that politicians actually run for power.

They actively seek it and, when they have got it, they don't want to lose it.

Ancient Greeks and, to some extent, Icelandics believe that the worst person to have in power is someone who actually wants power.

The old cliche "Power corrupts and Absolute Power corrupts absolutely" is still true.

Now I do realise that there are some people who do not enter parliament for self-aggrandisement and there might even be some who enter politics in order to help others.

In the case of this new Falklands dispute, I believe that the dispute is not based on simple patriotic sabre rattling or electioning-winning ploys but is based far more on the fact that the Falklands are sitting on the tip of an internationally agreed vector which decides where sub-sea mineral rights right down into the Antarctic are determined.

Sea-bed mineral nodule harvests as well as oil deposits are potentially vastly lucrative to whomever has the rights by virtue of owning the Falklands.

I would like to think that this is behind Gordon Brown's reaction just as it is most probably the original driving motor behind the Argentinians 'threat' to impose its will and sovereignty on these otherwise insignificant islands.

It is all about location, location, location.

If there is a spin-off in any victorious new Falklands war bringing potentially massive image boosting PR for a fading and probably doomed politician then that is a bonus.

I wonder, is there an election coming up in Argentina soon?


"I live in hope"