|
|
|
Topic: Military The new items published under this topic are as follows.
|
|
See all
"Hoon gets it right shock"
Posted by: DavidK on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 11:54 AM
[Topic:-Military]
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4371040.stm
Another person going to the High Court to get a pardon – if in this case only a conditional pardon – for a WW1 military execution.
Hoon turned down a full pardon for all the soldiers concerned when he was Def Sec following the year long review of records by the Adjutant Generals Corps supported by civilian historians and researchers. The conclusion was that while probably half were genuine shell shock cases the remainder of convictions were ‘right’, with a few maybes. And thus pardons to all the soldiers concerned was not reasonable and giving pardons to some would again raise the stigma of the ones who would not be pardoned as they deserved some form of punishment.
I wouldn’t agree that ‘the records don’t exist’ as the current Def Sec said - I have seen some case documentation where I would have had no hesitation in shooting the person involved.
But as he said, perhaps time to let it lie.
|
|
|
Where I can go on my holidays this year...
Posted by: DavidK on Friday, October 07, 2005 - 10:26 AM
[Topic:-Military]
|
"Everyone knows in reality our armed forces are totally and completely at the beck and call of Bush and the Neo-Cons doctrine."
I take BB's point but I wouldn't agree with 'totally and completely..."
This is the current unclassified list of official British Army Deployments - i.e. excluding training missions and excercises. We have a variable chance of getting shot at in:
Iraq (About 2 Brigades) – Multi-national force command – i.e. US Command
Afghanisatan (2 Battallions +) – NATO command
Northern Ireland (2 Brigades) – UK Command
Kosovo (KFOR) (2 Battle Groups) – NATO Command
Belize (Running down since 1994) – UK Command
Bosnia (SFOR) – NATO Command
Brunei (1 Battalion) – UK Command
Cyprus (2 Battalions on UK Command plus 1 battalion on rotation for UN commitments)
Falkland Islands (1 battalion) – UK Command
Sierra Leone (Running down) – UN Command
A nice mix of Blair's wars and end of empire things.
|
|
|
Operation Mirrorball: Has the Evening Standard been 'D Noticed'?
Posted by: ringverse on Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 12:56 AM
[Topic:-Military]
|
Last monday the London Evening Standard ran a story by Andrew Gilligan, about the British Government's dealings with an international arms dealer, who has links with Al Queda.
But the article was mysteriously pulled, and has dissappeared from the website. The Yorkshire Ranter, who has been chasing down stories abour Viktor Bout for some time, archived the story [as have chickenyoghurt, tim worstal and others]. He has requested other bloggers do the same:
Curious, the stories the media choses not to discuss...
Headline: HOW CAN BRITAIN STILL USE THE MERCHANT OF DEATH? Strapline: Today the UK will promise to curb arms traffickers. But the MoD is hiring planes from a dealer linked to Bin Laden.
By Andrew Gilligan. Evening Standard, Monday, 9th May 2005.
Victor Bout [sic] is the most notorious arms trafficker in the world. Linked to Osama bin Laden by the British government, linked to the Taliban by the US government, he was described by a New Labour minister as a "merchant of death" who must be shut down.
Yet an Evening Standard investigation has found that, just two months ago, a Victor Bout company was hired by that very same British government to operate military flights from a key RAF base.
Bout, a 38-year old Russian, owns or controls a constellation of airlines that have smuggled illegal weapons to conflict zones for the past 15 years. He has been named in countless official investigations and reports - the most recent only last month. The authorities in Belgium, where he used to work, have issued a warrant for his arrest. In 2004, the US froze his assets and put him on a terrorist watch list [not that they stopped him flying to and from Baghdad, TYR].
But between 6 and 9 March this year, according to official Civil Aviation Authority records, two Victor Bout charter flights took off from RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire. The cargo was armoured vehicles and a few British troops. The client was the Ministry of Defence.
The charters were operated by an airline called Trans Avia. It was named as one of Mr. Bout's front companies by the Government itself - in a Commons written answer on 2 May 2002. The Government cannot claim ignorance of Bout's dubious links. The Foreign Office minister Denis MacShane reassured MPs: "The UK has played a leading role in drawing international attention to Bout's activities, initially in Angola and Liberia and more recently relating to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda".
A specialist aviation journal reported that the "al Qaeda link" was Bout's role in supplying bin Laden with a personal aeroplane - in the days before September 11, when he had a little more freedom of movement. Could Trans Avia have gone legit since then? Not according to the United States Treasury Department. Only two weeks ago, on 26 April, the Treasury "designated" Trans Avia as one of 30 companies linked to Bout, "an international arms dealer and war profiteer". Bout "controls what is reputed to be the largest private fleet of Soviet-era cargo aircraft in the world", says the Treasury press release. "The arms he has sold or brokered have helped fuel conflicts and support UN-sanctioned regimes in Afghanistan, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Sudan. Notably, information available to the US government shows that Bout profited by $50 million by supplying the Taliban with military equipment when they ruled Afghanistan."
The story doesn't end there. Another two flights were made in the same three days of March by an airline called Jet Line International, also from RAF Brize Norton. A further three flights were made at the same time from another base, RAF Lyneham. The destination was Kosovo. The client, once again, was the Ministry of Defence.
Yet Jet Line, too, is a company that has been accused of close connections to Bout. According to the authoritative US newspaper, the Los Angeles Times, it appeared on a list of Bout companies circulated by the State Department to US diplomatic posts around the world.
"There is no doubt at all about the links between Jet Line and Bout," says Johan Peleman, the researcher who wrote the UN report. "It's one of his most important assets." Intelligence agencies say the same thing. Jet Line's office address in its base at Chisinau, Moldova, is the same as that of Aerocom, a company exposed by the United Nations as involved in sanctions-busting and arms-smuggling to the brutal rebels of Liberia. According to the UN, Aerocom was involved in the illegal smuggling or attempted smuggling of more than 6,000 automatic rifles and machine guns, 4,500 grenades, 350 missile launchers, 7,500 landmines, and millions of rounds of ammunition in breach of a UN arms embargo.
Tracking down the registration numbers of the sanctions-busting aircraft, it turns out that the Jet Line aircraft that flew the MoD flights in March were previously registered to Aerocom. They are in fact the same planes.
Bout's activities have helped cause quite literally thousands of deaths in many of the worst places in the world. Born in 1967, he served in the Soviet air force and then military intelligence, where he developed a gift for languages. When the USSR broke up, he "acquired" a large fleet of surplus or obsolete aircraft, which he used to deliver arms and ammunition also "acquired" from old Soviet stockpiles. That weaponry fuelled some of the most savage wars in Africa. Charles Taylor's insurgent guerrillas used Bout weapons to destroy Liberia. In Sierra Leone, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) used Bout weapons to terrorise the country, seize the diamond mines, and chop off their opponents' hands.
None of our business? Well, the RUF's Bout-supplied weapons were almost certainly used to attack British troops engaged on the Sierra Leone peacekeeping mission in 2000.
Bout's planes would arrive at obscure African airstrips, loaded with weapons, then leave heaped with diamonds, coltan - vital for making mobile phones - and other precious minerals in return. "He was apolitical," said one UN official. "He would fly for anyone that paid." Bout's willingness to go places that no-one else would go made him the market leader in the arms-trafficking business. Little wonder, therefore, that the then Foreign Office minister Peter Hain said "The murder and mayhem of Unita in Angola, the RUF in Sierra Leone, and groups in Congo would not have been as terrible without Bout's operations." He was truly "a merchant of death", Hain said [and for a long time I respected Hain for it, too - TYR].
Bout used to operate from Ostend, in Belgium, where a shabby hotel in the city centre acted as his informal marketplace. There was a flight departures screen in the hotel bar, so he could keep track of his planes' movements. Then he was forced to retreat to Sharjah, in the United Arab Emirates - and after September 11, to Moscow, where he controls his empire through front companies such as Trans Avia. "You are not putting facts. You are putting allegations," he tells journalists on the rare occasions they manage to get through on his Russian phone number. [Actually, the quote comes from his surprise appearance on Ekho Moskhy radio in 2002 - TYR]
Britain has been embarrassed by dodgy airlines before. Last year, the Department for International Development promised a full investigation after the Standard exposed its use of Aerocom on an aid flight to Africa. The problem is that few reputable carriers want to fly to Kosovo, Iraq, Darfur or some of the places where the government needs transport. And the airline brokers used by Whitehall seem to have learned surprisingly few lessons from past embarrassments.
In a statement, the Ministry of Defence said the fact that its broker "seems to have used an aircraft in Jet Line International livery" was not the same as saying that the MoD itself had contracted Jet Line. But, whatever hairs the MoD may choose to split, the payout - for Mr. Bout - is the same.
Today and tomorrow, at the MoD's vast procurement headquarters in Bristol, defence officials are holding a special conference with human rights groups and arms trade campaigners. The purpose is to persuade them that the government is serious about cracking down on the scourge of arms trafficking.
One good way to start might, perhaps, be to stop putting British taxpayers' money into the pockets of the worst arms trafficker in the world."
|
|
|
Just How Angry are the Army Over the Legal Advice for War?
Posted by: ringverse on Sunday, May 01, 2005 - 06:21 PM
[Topic:-Military]
|
Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, the former Chief of the Defence Staff has gone public about the Army's fury over the Legal advice provided to them over the war.
The man who led Britain's armed forces into Iraq has said that Tony Blair and the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, will join British soldiers in the dock if the military are ever prosecuted for war crimes in Iraq.
In a remarkably frank interview that goes to the heart of the political row over the Attorney General's legal advice, Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, the former Chief of the Defence Staff, said he did not have full legal cover from prosecution at the International Criminal Court (ICC).
'If my soldiers went to jail and I did, some other people would go with me,' said Boyce.
And still we are being told to forget about Iraq and how we went to war, it isn't an election issue!
...Asked whether the government had provided him with the legal cover necessary to avoid prosecution for war crimes, he replied: 'No.'
He added: 'I think I have done as best as I can do. I have always been troubled by the ICC. Although I was reassured ... when [discussions over signing up to the ICC were] going through Whitehall about five years ago, I was patted on the head and told: "Don't worry, on the day it will be fine." I don't have 100 per cent confidence in that.'
Anyone who claims that the furore over Lord Goldsmith's legal advice is academic might try explaining that argument to friends of mine, who have relatives serving in Iraq.
|
|
|
The Real WMD
Posted by: quarsan on Sunday, May 01, 2005 - 04:43 PM
[Topic:-Military]
|
Of course there is a real threat from WMD. From North Korea, not Iraq. The NK regime is truly monsterous, does have nukes, will sell missiles to anyone and is up for any dirty stuff a terrorist of government would want. I've met their Foreign Minister and a small team of representatives and, to be blunt, they are paranoid fruitcakes.
Are they nuts enough to start firing nukes. Yes. In 1998 they lobbed a missile over - yes over - Japan. Well, it sends a message and all that. Now they either have, or are very close to having, the ability to put a nuclear warhead on their missiles.
You would think that the intelligence services would be watching like a hawk. They are, but does anyone find this reassuring?
The U.S. military informed Japan that North Korea may have fired a short-range missile toward the Sea of Japan on Sunday morning, Kyodo News service and national broadcaster NHK reported.
The reports quoted unidentified government sources as saying that the U.S. military informed Japan's Defense Agency of the possible missile launch. The government was attempting to confirm the information, the reports said.
May? Possible? That must comfort them in Seoul.
|
|
|
|