This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/15/aint-gonna-study-war-no-more
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Ain't gonna study war no more | Ain't gonna study war no more |
| (about 2 months later) | |
| The banner I carried on the protest against the Iraq war (We didn't stop the war. But we did so much more, 15 February) bore the words: "Disarm the world, not just Iraq." That remains the key to stopping the slaughter in the illegal wars and other conflicts that continue. I wrote at the time that "not in my name is not enough". The arms trade, which provided Saddam and all the other dictators with their weapons in the first place, and still does today to the remaining ones – until they in turn become the enemy – must be eliminated almost completely. | The banner I carried on the protest against the Iraq war (We didn't stop the war. But we did so much more, 15 February) bore the words: "Disarm the world, not just Iraq." That remains the key to stopping the slaughter in the illegal wars and other conflicts that continue. I wrote at the time that "not in my name is not enough". The arms trade, which provided Saddam and all the other dictators with their weapons in the first place, and still does today to the remaining ones – until they in turn become the enemy – must be eliminated almost completely. |
| As Gary Younge pointed out (Obama wants gun control at home but is a killer abroad, 11 February), the arguments for gun control at home are equally valid on the international scene, yet the blatant hypocrisy of the actual practice is rarely mentioned. It is not "No war on Iraq" that is needed, but "No war". Widening the issue to next year's centenary of the outbreak of "the war to end wars", Franklin Roosevelt said: "More than an end to war, what we need is an end to the beginnings of war." That would certainly have been relevant in 1914, it was relevant in 2003 and it is still relevant today. Frank Jackson Former co-chair, World Disarmament Campaign | As Gary Younge pointed out (Obama wants gun control at home but is a killer abroad, 11 February), the arguments for gun control at home are equally valid on the international scene, yet the blatant hypocrisy of the actual practice is rarely mentioned. It is not "No war on Iraq" that is needed, but "No war". Widening the issue to next year's centenary of the outbreak of "the war to end wars", Franklin Roosevelt said: "More than an end to war, what we need is an end to the beginnings of war." That would certainly have been relevant in 1914, it was relevant in 2003 and it is still relevant today. Frank Jackson Former co-chair, World Disarmament Campaign |
| • The additional relevant question provoked by your leading article (15 February), and by the associated articles on the march 10 years ago, is how one can judge the relative effectiveness of demonstrations and party political involvement. Perhaps unusually, the Iraq war is a clear-cut case: only one major party solidly and openly opposed the invasion. The Lib Dems believed that the invasion was contrary to international law and every Lib Dem MP was present and voted against the invasion in the parliamentary vote on 18 March 2003. If those on the march who believed that this issue was a defining political question had got actively involved in the Liberal Democrat party, who knows how the politics of the past decade may have worked out. | • The additional relevant question provoked by your leading article (15 February), and by the associated articles on the march 10 years ago, is how one can judge the relative effectiveness of demonstrations and party political involvement. Perhaps unusually, the Iraq war is a clear-cut case: only one major party solidly and openly opposed the invasion. The Lib Dems believed that the invasion was contrary to international law and every Lib Dem MP was present and voted against the invasion in the parliamentary vote on 18 March 2003. If those on the march who believed that this issue was a defining political question had got actively involved in the Liberal Democrat party, who knows how the politics of the past decade may have worked out. |
| It is, alas, easier to demonstrate than to be involved in the party political slog, but it is arguably less effective. Certainly to be passionate about political issues but to opt out of party politics while still criticising the parties is perverse. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds | It is, alas, easier to demonstrate than to be involved in the party political slog, but it is arguably less effective. Certainly to be passionate about political issues but to opt out of party politics while still criticising the parties is perverse. Michael Meadowcroft Leeds |
| • I would agree that the protest "dramatically raised the consciousness of millions of people about the actions being carried out in their name". But for me it was a defining political experience insofar as it confirmed that politicians were (and are still not) listening to us. It was an event that shattered my "moral compass". When something so obviously wrong goes ahead despite such massive protest then what is left of society's humanity? | • I would agree that the protest "dramatically raised the consciousness of millions of people about the actions being carried out in their name". But for me it was a defining political experience insofar as it confirmed that politicians were (and are still not) listening to us. It was an event that shattered my "moral compass". When something so obviously wrong goes ahead despite such massive protest then what is left of society's humanity? |
| I'm convinced a main consequence of politicians ignoring the protest is a wide and general disengagement of the public from politics. Indeed, at the time of the protests one popular poster read "No blood for oil", but in the years since Iraq we have disengaged our consciences to such an extent that we even refuse to recognise the link between our insatiable thirst for oil and ongoing social injustice and environmental destruction (war, repression, global warming, drones etc). | I'm convinced a main consequence of politicians ignoring the protest is a wide and general disengagement of the public from politics. Indeed, at the time of the protests one popular poster read "No blood for oil", but in the years since Iraq we have disengaged our consciences to such an extent that we even refuse to recognise the link between our insatiable thirst for oil and ongoing social injustice and environmental destruction (war, repression, global warming, drones etc). |
| Rather than celebrating the protests we should be analysing what the negative consequences have been for our consciences, our souls and our humanity. Alan Mitcham Cologne, Germany | Rather than celebrating the protests we should be analysing what the negative consequences have been for our consciences, our souls and our humanity. Alan Mitcham Cologne, Germany |
| • The world now knows that Blair lied to the British people and to parliament and that the Iraq war was an enormous injustice. But what about the "War on terror"? Here, at last, the US war economy has achieved the ultimate prize: war without end, cheered on by our leaden, imperialist-fixated leaders. For every "suspected terrorist" and his family "taken out" by a drone we create 100 new implacable enemies. The system is foolproof. The rampant militarists now have an entirely secure future. Jim McCluskey Twickenham, Middlesex | • The world now knows that Blair lied to the British people and to parliament and that the Iraq war was an enormous injustice. But what about the "War on terror"? Here, at last, the US war economy has achieved the ultimate prize: war without end, cheered on by our leaden, imperialist-fixated leaders. For every "suspected terrorist" and his family "taken out" by a drone we create 100 new implacable enemies. The system is foolproof. The rampant militarists now have an entirely secure future. Jim McCluskey Twickenham, Middlesex |
| • It is worth noting that there were also Stop the war marches in both Glasgow and Belfast. The Belfast march was about 10,000 strong and cross-community. There was no violence. Bob Osborne Professor emeritus, University of Ulster | • It is worth noting that there were also Stop the war marches in both Glasgow and Belfast. The Belfast march was about 10,000 strong and cross-community. There was no violence. Bob Osborne Professor emeritus, University of Ulster |
| guardian.co.uk today is our daily snapshot of the top news stories, sent to your inbox at 8am |