Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 05:57 AM

"I think only you respond to his nonsense now, Jim."
Had enough of allowing an abusive poster fucking up threads
It takes a special talent to close an obituary thread -time he either stopped or was gone
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 04:53 AM

What a strange, perverse idea for a Right-Wing Extremist to come up with - that it's a country's responsibility to prevent people from leaving. The former USSR would be proud of him. What next - a concrete wall on the French coast, with border guards shooting 'escapees'?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 04:52 AM

I think only you respond to his nonsense now, Jim. As long as you keep responding he will keep abusing. It is in your hands to stop it.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 04:12 AM

From today's Observer

Senior Tory and Labour MPs are planning to force the government to delay Brexit by several months to avoid a no-deal outcome if Theresa May fails to get her deal through parliament in January, the Observer has been told.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/29/cross-party-stop-the-clock-hard-brexit-no-deal-29-march

Some good news, then.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 04:12 AM

"more little jimmie rubbish!"
New Year resolution broken before New Year - tsk - tsk
Can some mod get this feller intoi line and save me having to collect his history of abuse and post it to them please ?
This behaviour should not be tolerated on a debating forum

Of curse they are refugees - you don't need papers to flee a war
Do you think the Jews who fled the Nazis all arrived with "papers"
Stop being so inhumanly stupid
You'll be saying that those who managed to get through should go and sleep rough instead of being given the use of vacant private property, as you did with the Grenfell survivors
Let someone else deal with them doesn't hack it - we are part of the responsibility of what is happening in the world today by either supporting and/or selling arms to scumbags like your friend Assad

Brexit was aimed directly at keeping 'the sick, needy and those in peril' out of Britain, as is being shown by the minister on tele last night
Shortly we are likely to see a wave of refugees from the Yemen, fleeing the effects of British fighter planes sold to the Saudis
Maybe it's time Britain built a Trump/Berlin-type wall, eh Iains ?

"No Jim, no one has mentioned D contracts."
May has demanded confidentiality orders be issued to Medical firm employees who are at present working on plans to deal with what is likely to happen to medical supplies should Britain crash out of Europe - I think 60 have been issued so far
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 05:12 PM

EU team who are trying to prevent an orderly Brexit, or, if they can't prevent it, to make it as expensive for the UK as they can.

I think any objective observer would see more or less the direct opposite. Faced with a devious and fundamentally untrustworthy set of negotiators from the UK, the EU has done it's best to act reasonably and consistently. It has been remarkably ready to do its best to cope with impossibilist demands by the UK. It has whittled down the debt owed by the UK in respect of commitments previously entered it to a fraction of the actual total.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 03:33 PM

The EU team are trying to get the best deal possible for the EU. And by chance, often also for the British people. Not so much for the British government, which is the stumbling block in all of this. If Theresa May would relay her insane red line insisting that she take away the right of Freedom of Movement for the British People, then progress might be made.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 03:24 PM

We are faced with exactly the EU team we knew we would have when those statements were made. The EU was always going to work in what it perceived in its best interests, which would be financial and political and social and every other interest. Make as much of 'should and 'would' as you like, but the reality was always that, and none of the Leave spokespeople said that as explicitly as they spoke of things being easy.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 03:19 PM

Nigel please !!!

Once again you are arguing semantics, I realise it is important to you but the rest of us understood what Backwoodsman was driving at.

Do you have ANY good news about Brexit for instance.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 03:10 PM

Going from Backwoodsman's link "Liam Fox says Brexit will be 'the easiest thing in history' - The Independent"

What The Independent actually quotes is: This may explain why Liam Fox is so confident, saying on Thursday the Brexit agreement should be “the easiest deal in human history”.

Again, to quote Backwoodsman's link: All the times David Davis said Brexit would be simple - New Statesman
Nowhere in that article does David Davies say that "Brexit would be simple".

I realise that some of the remainers here have a problem with the English language, but they are following the example of those who are trying to sabotage Brexit by misquoting the people actually faced with delivering Brexit.

Brexit should be straightforward, if we weren't faced with the EU team who are trying to prevent an orderly Brexit, or, if they can't prevent it, to make it as expensive for the UK as they can.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 02:54 PM

No Jim, no one has mentioned D contracts. Do you have any details to share with people here.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 02:49 PM

Has anybody mentiuoned the disgusting display of humanity by British politicians strutting on camera and telling the world how they are going to keep Britain clean and pure from the infection of refugees Britain is either directly involved in or has acted as armourer for

Can't remember if anybody mentioned of the sixty odd D-type contracts May has demanded be issued to ascertain that the British people are kept in the dark over the emergency plans now being put into place to divert the likely medicine supply crisis that is likely to appear should Britain crash out of Europe
"We've had your vote folks so you can now fuck off"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 02:32 PM

All the times David Davis said Brexit would be simple - New Statesman

Liam Fox says Brexit will be 'the easiest thing in history' - The Independent

11 times Brexiteers said Brexit would be easy

Utter, utter, fuckwitted cockwombles.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 02:18 PM

Oh Dear! Irish Government accused of ‘standing idly by’ as UK bolsters ferry links for Brexit

4 hours ago!"Brexit on holiday?" In your dreams laddie!

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-accused-of-standing-idly-by-as-uk-bolsters-ferry-links-for-brexit-1.3744328

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 02:16 PM

I wouldn't say Brexit is on holiday: the MPs are, but the clock ticks on regardless. Hence the extra ferries Raggy referred to, and the slightly odd articles about John Redwood's knighthood. In one Guardian article it is claimed the knighthood is being offered to try to sway him vote to support May's deal. Someone has a fevered imagination I think - I see not the slightest chance it would do any such thing.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 02:09 PM

I fink the Taoiseach is about as popular as Macron. Like Macron he should tidy up his own backyard before doing his damnedest to frustrate brexitf

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/2019-chaos-crisis-and-conflict-as-brexit-looms-37645897.html

For example:
"The UK leaving the EU presents the most serious threat to Irish farming and our agri-food sector in the history of the State.
IFA has identified the critical issues for farming and food and clear objectives that must be delivered to secure the interests of Ireland’s vital agri-food sector in the years ahead."

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 01:23 PM

Meanwhile .......... Back to Brexit.

It is reported today that the UK government is spending over 100 million to secure extra ferries to try and limited the negative impact on major ports in the event of a no-deal situation.

Could someone kindly link to the article in todays Guardian entited 'Brexit over 100 million spent on extra ferries'

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 06:35 AM

Wot !?! No Herodotus, no Thucydides, no Xenophon, no Cato the Elder, no Livy, Ceasar or Tacitus ?

The Venerable Bede no longer venerated ?

If your history is historical it can no longer be history?

Sounds like potty water to me.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 06:15 AM

Make sure that they're living historians only, writing in the last thirty years and whose books may be found on the shelves of reputable bookshops. Definitely nothing by AJP Taylor or Alan Clark, natch. It would be good to see someone such as yourself continuing to carry the flag...

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 04:21 AM

"Too much christmas spirit I think!"
Come back when you sober up then
Plenty to respond to there if you're that way inclined
How about a New Years Resolution that you'll join in instead of throwing stones from a safe distance - does wonders for the image and the personal satisfaction !!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 29 Dec 18 - 03:43 AM

Too much christmas spirit I think!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Dec 18 - 09:10 PM

Wi' knobs on, Jim, wi' knobs on, walkin' about wi' clogs on!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Dec 18 - 07:52 PM

Missed a bit
Happy New Year to all
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 25 Dec 18 - 10:03 AM

Some good reading here, and in the article linked to in the piece, about the reasons why people voted leave - as a deep-seated protest against the inequalities and injustices in our own country.

Worth reading, when the inanities of ChristmasDayTV begin to pall.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 24 Dec 18 - 08:01 PM

Festive greetings to all.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Dec 18 - 07:35 PM

A Christmas Truce.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Dec 18 - 03:35 PM

As a break from our usual disputes, here's hoping everyone on this site, and this thread in particular, gets to enjoy this time in whatever way suits them. Celebrate with friends and family or just relaxing quietly: however you choose to spend it. I have little doubt that whatever our different views, each person on here is arguing for the country to be the best it can be, even though we differ on what that means. The next few months look as if they will be as eventful as the last ones, and depending on what happens so might the coming years. But just for a few days, we can put that aside, I hope, and wish each other well.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 18 - 08:31 AM

In addition to above
With the vast reduction of the political influence of the Catholic church in the Republic, one of the greatest excuses for not re-unifying used by the Unionists has now been removed
The shenanigans by the Northern fundamentalists regarding abortion and same-sex marriage is quit likely to do the same job
HOPEFULLY, THE SAME WILL SOON BE THE CASE REGARDING DIVORCE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 18 - 05:59 AM

"three interested parties simultaneously."
No foreign country can possibly have a say inn this
If Britain, why not The E.U. ?
Nonsense

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Dec 18 - 05:40 AM

Saw a good one on FarceBook this morning - "Country which says, "Everything will be fine after Brexit" brought to a standstill by a toy helicopter". :-) :-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Dec 18 - 05:37 AM

"Probably one of the most disturbing aspects of Brexit is the rise of English Nationalist Fundamentalism, with accusations of "traitor" being flung about"

Nah Jim, our resident Right-Wing Extremist says that's just a 'lefty terminological inexactitude' (his rather pompous, clever-shit way of saying 'lie').

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 18 - 04:12 AM

Probably one of the most disturbing aspects of Brexit is the rise of English Nationalist Fundamentalism, with accusations of "traitor" being flung about
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Dec 18 - 03:22 AM

"Ending the incorporation of Northern Ireland in the UK and the reunification of Ireland are two different issues"
Not intentionally - inevitably
These issues have become entwined due to Brexit, which threatens the economies and the social well-being of both the North and the South (and, to some extent Scotland) - from the very beginning it was suggested that Brexit would break up the United Kingdom
Northern Ireland has not had a Governing body for nearly two years, the D.U.P. has been caught up in scandals, has been under pressure after the Abortion vote in the South, no longer holds an overall majority and is faced with a situation where the desire for a United Ireland has shot up to near parity
Given the right conditions, Ireland can move to reunification naturally and without too much trouble - nearly a century overdue.

The now extremely unstable British Government is in the ridiculous position of not being able to survive without bribing a Party that cannot itself survive without the co-operation of other parties - At a time when Britain desperately need a united and coherent leadership and the goodwill of the British British people (who are not even trusted enough be given the right to re-confirm that their decision to leave Europe is still valid), it is as far away from any of that as sending a probe to Alpha Centuri   

What a fine ******* mess they've got us into Ollie
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 12:35 PM

So Corbyn has restated that it is Labour policy to continue with Brexit. There is no change here since the referendum and the last party conference but I think there is a far amount of cynical calculation here. All parties have multiple policies - Brexit, yes, but also housing, education, NHS, and so on. I suspect that the calculation is that Labour Remainers have nowhere else to go, and the stance on those other issues will keep them voting Labour. On the other hand if Labour backed Remain, an unknown number would switch to Conservative. And of course it is true that the EU rules on state investment are an obstacle to Corbyn's investment plans. But left wing unicorns are just as I.aginary as right wing ones, I fear.

It is a policy that could very easily come unstuck. Most party members are Remainers, and they are the ones who is it comes to it are out knocking on doors, posting campaign leaflets and on voting day giving lifts to prospective voters. Alienating that group should not be undertaken lightly.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 11:43 AM

Back to the subject
"As I said before if a direct link was cheaper that the UK landbridge everyone would be sailing. "
Any major changes of rout woud mean the re-organisation of long-standing practices
Up to now, the old system has worked perfectly well - should things not alter radically the new vessels will be an addition to an efficient and well established business
Jim Carroll

From the BBC 26th November
On Monday, the assembly's Brexit Committee will release a report saying that a 'no-deal' Brexit would pose a "serious threat" to the ports sector in Wales.

The committee's chair David Rees AM said: "What we found is that there needs to be a step-change in Welsh Government activity to support the sector prepare for a no-deal Brexit.

"If our worst fears of new delays and checks at Welsh ports like Holyhead and Fishguard are realised, Wales will need detailed plans to manage the fallout.

"That is why we were calling on the Welsh Government to publish details of any traffic management contingency plans it has, including outlining what new infrastructure spending may be required."

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 10:49 AM

Footnot
If you continue to behave as you are I am going to gather all your abusive postings and send them directly to a mos, requestiing why you should be allowed to continue the way you have always done
You are, of course, welcome to do the same
Pack it in for all our sakes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 10:19 AM

" and who is the biggest offender by a country mile. "
You are - you've been given a fraction of your series insulting - you have come up with nothing

"See what I mean you can't stop yourself
You know if you behaved as you do face to face wiuthout a gang behinfd you oyu'd end up with a mouthful of loose teeth
Man up, for the sake of this thread and this form
Stop behaving like a gestapo thug - you impress nobody
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 10:03 AM

"It seems that Mudcat's requirements that members are civil to each other don't apply to some people." Yes Jimmie and who is the biggest offender by a country mile. You have the rare distinction on here of even insulting deceased members, to the disgust of all!
Physician heal thyself springs to mind. But the blindingly obvious escapes little jimmy

A few points.
Some 50 percent of Ireland's hauliers serve the Continent, and 30 percent of them carry refrigerated goods, where every hour counts.
https://www.politico.eu/article/cargo-food-production-producers-brexit-burns-irelands-british-bridge-to-eu-markets/

The first superferry has already started service the "brexit buster" MV Celine. For such a "cheap,efficient service", I wonder why it is presently operating the present service?
Zeebrugge        2018-12-21 07:05
Killingholme        2018-12-20 07:21
Zeebrugge        2018-12-19 08:29
Killingholme        2018-12-18 08:11
Zeebrugge        2018-12-17 08:09
For accuracy it's present position is off Salcombe,en route to Dublin.
As I said before if a direct link was cheaper that the UK landbridge everyone would be sailing. But for a rigid as opposed to a semi trailer,you have to pay the driver 40hrs of a round trip to do nothing.
I cannot find a direct comparison but I recall a round trip from Plymouth to Santander was approx 3 times the cost of Rosslare to Fishguard. The former distance is 800 miles, Dublin to Zeebrugge slightly less.
If it was cheaper it would not be skipping in and out of the UK'S biggest port inorder to fill it's timetable.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 08:43 AM

The bulk of Irish goods go through the tunnel - Ireland now has the wherewithal to deliver in Europe more cheaply by sea should the borders close -
The difference of sea and land times is made up by the fact that drivers will no longer have to waste time and money with accommodation and will be able to sleep while travelling
The main problem will have been avoided as there need by no delays caused by border bureaucracy
Ireland has thought out the problems of a hard Brexit, Britain has not even made up its mind how it is to exit - then they will, ahve to start planning

"Unfocused waffle.Do you ever check anything?"
If youu have no self control or self respect, can you not at least give a thought to your few mates here
The picture you present of Brexiteers is a bunch of mindless bullying thugs who, whenever faced with a difficult question, opt for hurling personal abuse
The fact that you do so conscious of the fact that you risk no comebacks because you do so from the safety of distance of anonymity and distance makes you a spineless coward
You wouldn't dare abuse people to their faces the way you do here - you know damn well that they would either laugh at you are punch you - hardly the behavior of a patriotic hero !!
It is totally beyond me why mods continue to close threads (like the one you and your mates closed recently) yet allow you to strut and bully towards fellow members - if they got rid of your mates for similar behaviour, why not you?
It seems that Mudcat's requirements that members are civil to each other don't apply to some people
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 07:09 AM

@ Mayomick: this is the sort of comment that that more or less makes me think let's get out of that damned island and let them get on with killing eachother again.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 06:51 AM

DMcG I was talking about the present situation.

My apologies. I forgot you regard it as inappropriate to think three months ahead. Unlike the ROI where, as Jim pointed out, they are in the process of obtaining those ships 'in the present situation', presumably because the businesses concerned think it is good economics.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 05:32 AM

DMcG I was talking about the present situation. Your contribution assumes a change in the status quo. It is patently obvious that a change could conceivably modify the present economic model.
I could be wrong but I believe the present schedule of the superferry to europe carries primarily tanks and trailers and few tractor units.
Who wants a tractor unit trapped on a ferry for 80 hours per round trip?
But not every truck is an artic. in fact they are a minority.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 05:04 AM

The clincher is that if it made any kind of economic sense they would have introduced super ferries years ago.

Hardly a clincher. *Any* changes to tariffs or costs due to changed paperwork and timings, etc, change the economics. What is most advantageous under one set of arrangements may not be under another, and vice versa.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 04:50 AM

No extra time involved - goods are at present carried by road through Britain and through the Channel Tunnel

To quote your little mate: Unfocused waffle.Do you ever check anything?

Example Dublin to Rotterdam via UK land bridge less than 20hours.
By single ferry journey 45 hours.

Nominally 8 hours ferry time using landbridge as opposed to 45 hours continuous ferry.

The clincher is that if it made any kind of economic sense they would have introduced super ferries years ago.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Dec 18 - 04:17 AM

"The additional Time at sea and escalated costs will only impact the Irish. "
No extra time involved - goods are at present carried by road through Britain and through the Channel Tunnel
A sea journey without barriers can't possibly take that long - Ireland has already equipped itself with a number of giant transport ships in preparation for Brexit (and Britain still has no plans whatever as to what they intend to do when and if they leave) - economic and social insanity
Beside the point anyway
Fishguard depends greatly on commercial trade passing through to and from from Ireland - that gone, do is a large slice of their income
Nice way to stat to "stand on our own two feet"

Another possible victim of the economic uncertain future of Belfast's Harland and Woolf which is being put up for sale by its Norwegian parent company
If, say, the Japanese decide to buy it up and close it as a competitor, that will be the end of the British shipbuilding and repair industry - another giant leap into Brexit's Brave New World
JIm Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 21 Dec 18 - 07:48 PM

From: KarenH - PM
Date: 21 Dec 18 - 05:18 PM
Nigel, the point I made was relating to a quote explicitly about food from the EU. To the best of my knowledge South Africa is not in the EU.

Your knowledge is correct, South Africa is not part of the EU.
But I was responding to your comment about views given in "The Sun": Not a rag I read.

Your comment was:
Lovely comment in The Sun that shortages of fresh fruit and veg from the EU will only affect effete Londoners who should stop eating foreign food. Some Sun readers grew up eating only seasonal veg grown at home; some think we can get 'fresh' fruit and veg more cheaply from non EU countries because the EU 'fraudulently' keeps the price of them high. If this is so, why have the supermarkets not being doing it anyway?

Another Sun comment is that under WTO we can suggest a trade deal with no duty either way and no strings attached. I suppose we could suggest it.

The comment made no mention of the source of the fruit and veg, nor a link to the original article to allow us to have any idea what (exactly) you were talking about.
I responded to your comments. If you wish to be more specific as to what you think you're discussing, please provide the details.

Bear in mind that the expression "fresh fruit and veg from the EU" does not automatically mean produce originated/grown in the EU.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Dec 18 - 06:59 PM

I rather think that prices of a lot of British produce will rise, if there's the predicted lack of harvesters from elsewhere in Europe.

And it seems pretty likely that the value of the pound relative to other currencies is liable to go through the floor in a No Deal Brexit. That would inflate the price for any imports from anywhere. Even during these endless two and a half years in Limbo it's gone down to near parity with the euro (£1 /= €1.11).

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 21 Dec 18 - 05:18 PM

Nigel, the point I made was relating to a quote explicitly about food from the EU. To the best of my knowledge South Africa is not in the EU.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 21 Dec 18 - 02:05 PM

"One of the immediate effects is that Ireland, which now exports via Fishguard will be exporting by sea straight to Europe, which will almost certainly decimate Fishguard as a port"
The additional Time at sea and escalated costs will only impact the Irish. Far more sensible to revert to TIR
The TIR Convention establishes an international customs transit system with maximum facility to move goods:

    in sealed vehicles or containers;
    from a customs office of departure in one country to a customs office of destination in another country;
    without requiring extensive and time-consuming border checks at intermediate borders;
    while, at the same time, providing customs authorities with the required security and guarantees.

The TIR system not only covers customs transit by road but a combination is possible with other modes of transport (e.g., rail, inland waterway, and even maritime transport), as long as at least one part of the total transport is made by road.
or is that too easy?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 21 Dec 18 - 01:57 PM

"Actually since the comment in this that the US in Syria were 'illegal' which reflects what Putin said on the subject I have been thinking we have a Russian operating on this site."

No UN mandate equals illegality of action. Show me any UN authorisation.
As far as I am aware the only mandate operating is mentioned below:
"Security Council Grants Six-Month Mandate Renewal for United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, Adopting Resolution 2450 (2018)"
1)The fallacious argument in Iraq:
In the run-up to the Iraq war of 2003, there was the famous 45-minute claim concerning Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction. Laying the ground for an argument of anticipatory self-defence against a strike that might come in the future, the UK argued that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction might reach UK military bases in Cyprus with minimum warning.

2)The doctrine of forcible humanitarian action gained credence throughout the 1990s when it was applied to rescue the Kurds of northern Iraq and the Marsh Arabs in the south of Iraq from destruction by Saddam Hussein. It was later employed unopposed in cases including Liberia and Sierra Leone.

However, international division about its application emerged in the wake of the operation on behalf of the Kosovo Albanians of 1999.

Since then, the UN has embraced the concept that international action can be taken to rescue a population under immediate threat. However, the doctrine of responsibility to protect (R2P) was narrowed down to cover operations mandated by the Security Council. Still, a number of states claim a right to act when the Council cannot.

Not much point in having an international body if it is consistantly ignored. How many resolutions id Israel in breach of?