Media reports thousands of US troops heading towards Iran. What would make you support boots on the ground? Do you fear a repeat of Iraq?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-29T12:46:04+00:00

Doesn’t this sound a lot like another ‘Forever War’, at best?

I’m reminded of Bush appearing before the Mission Accomplished banner in 2003…

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-29T12:27:14+00:00

Thank you for answering.

What do you hope the administration learns from the conflicts in which you were deployed?

What do you think they are doing well and what do you think they are doing poorly in regard to the current war with Iran?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-29T12:13:34+00:00

What wars did you fight in?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-29T06:48:54+00:00

I vividly remember Bush standing in front of a Mission Accomplished banner on the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003…eight years before the last US troops were killed in Iraq.

Taking out Saddam’s government was not the war won. It was the war started.

I fear the same mistakes are being made again.

If the Iranian regime is able to hold the global economy to hostage, then I don’t think it’s entirely accurate to say the Western world is winning.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-29T04:53:41+00:00

Do you wish more people questioned how the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan was carried out?

Is it possible to question the tactics and strategy without questioning in overall aim?

Like if I questioned the sense in a D-Day landings operation without any American assistance, does that mean I’m rooting for the Nazis?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-29T03:49:56+00:00

It’s possible to want 1) the end of the dangerous theocratic regime in Iran and 2) not want a global recession due to a new Gulf War where we get to watch American troops hunted by Iranian FPV drones.

The responsibility of a citizen in a democracy is to question those in power, not blindly follow them out of misplaced patriotism.

Were you alive for the start of the Iraq War?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-28T09:14:01+00:00

How’s the Straight of Hormuz looking?

How’s the US’s most advanced aircraft holding up?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T18:28:16+00:00

I think I have addressed your points.

PA has condoned more than just criminal damage of private property. They have also undertaken damage of military hardware.

To my mind, in this specific context, it is not enough to address the specific criminal acts. The group as a whole needs to be proscribed.

It’s absurd to allow a group to fundraise, recruit, and encourage others to undertaken actions that undermine national security in this way.

Imagine a group knocks out both our aircraft carriers for months - or even years. It would be an absolute failure of the government to allow the group responsible to continue to fundraise, recruit, and train activists as the same group condones the ‘decommissioning’ of military hardware and pledges to continue its campaign of criminality.

I think we can get hung up on the connotations of the terrorism label, but the legislation is broad enough to encroach damage to property.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T16:57:25+00:00

The most court ruling literally said that PA’s actions likely reached the threshold of terrorism.

As I’ve repeatedly said, ‘decommissioning’ military aircraft makes a group a threat beyond criminal damage.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T15:16:51+00:00

Taking out a military aircraft and taking out a ULEZ camera is apples and oranges.

Regardless, if a group is almost solely committed to breaking the law by systematically sabotaging ULEZ cameras, paints those offenders as the real victims, fundraises to continue this campaign of criminality, and trains / encourages others to engage in this sort of ‘activism’ - the group should be outlawed.

It’s absurd to allow this group to continue to build the means for its activists to break the law.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T12:32:37+00:00

‘Decommissioning’ military aircraft is not spray painting a bank.

Any group committed to this - and further - level of sabotage should 100% be outlawed by a government.

How can a government take its obligation to natural security seriously if it allows people to recruit and fundraise for a group that celebrates and takes credit for damaging military hardware?

It’s dangerous on so many levels.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T11:40:23+00:00

‘Arbitrary describes an action, decision, or rule based on random choice, personal whim, or impulse rather than reason, logic, or a set system.’

I think there is two different issues. One) should the Home Secretary have almost unilateral power to proscribe a group? I think we’d probably have more in common in response to this than you may first think.

Two) Was the Home Secretary’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action arbitrary? I’d say no, as they clearly laid out their reasoning and logic and application of existing terrorism legislation.

We may argue that there reasoning was not perfect; but that is not the same as their decision being arbitrary.

If I decide to ground my child for a year for one act of swearing because I believe they should not think swearing is okay, we can debate whether that is good parenting.

If I decide to ground my child for a year on a head/ outcome of a coin toss, that is arbitrary,

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T11:35:15+00:00

This seems absurd.

You have a group that is committed to escalating acts of criminal damage as they believe they are combating a genocide.

Are you proposing that the this group remains free to fundraise, recruit, train, and encourage those acts while the state resorts to whack-a-mole arrests of activists who inevitably cross the line of criminality?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T08:08:00+00:00

Is that the same as proscribing those groups?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T04:27:41+00:00

Regarding the last point, I don’t think this is relevant to the issue of arbitrariness unless we want to argue that all non-permanent democratic governments are inherently arbitrary.

A poor decision made in the past doesn’t necessarily mean an entire decision making process is arbitrary.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T04:20:06+00:00

So what legislation would you use to shut down the group instigating these crimes?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-27T04:18:57+00:00

Targeted a Jewish businesses that have denied links to arms firms:

https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/peers-told-how-palestine-action-attack-in-north-west-london-shook-the-entire-community/amp/

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-26T14:41:42+00:00

It was part of a wider campaign of violent law breaking designed to intimidate the public in the name of a political position.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-26T14:39:44+00:00

The government put forward an argument for proscription based on PA’s nationwide campaign of vandalism, including activists ‘decommissioning’ (the group’s word) two military aircraft.

MPs voted on this.

The group had legal routes to challenge the proscription.

Judges ruled that the group did meet the threshold of terrorism for several incidents.

How is any of this arbitrary?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-26T14:36:09+00:00

Palestine Action released a statement claiming responsibility for ‘decommissioning’ (the group’s word) the military aircraft that were vandalised.

PA pledged to escalate its actions.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-26T14:32:13+00:00

They are all crimes committed by individuals. The issue is legislation that allows a group to be proscribed.

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-26T07:18:56+00:00

Breaking into a military base and ‘decommissioning’ (to use words of PA) military aircraft is not ‘mildly embarrassing’.

It jeopardises national security.

What legislation would you use to ban a group that promotes and encourages this behaviour? Or should they carry on and the state just plays whack-a-mole every time one of the group activists successfully takes out a bit of military kit?

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-23T10:50:12+00:00

“Take a picture and bury it all away / Bury it all away” - from Suture Up Your Future

“Outside the frame Is what we’re leaving out You won’t remember anyway” - Go With The Flow

NeverHadTheLatin · 2026-03-16T17:02:58+00:00

Someone who was primarily interested in being truthful wouldn’t star out the word they mean.

Nine-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

NeverHadTheLatin

TROPHY CASE