Defence Spending

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is a bit like the National Health Service. It is a sacred cow to whom the nations of the Western world must irrevocably commit, and like the NHS any threat to or reduction in the effectiveness of NATO is met with almost condemnation.

Recently Mr Trump pointed out the disparity between defence spending by various NATO members. NATO guidelines call on nations who are members to spend at least 2% of their gross domestic product (their gross incomes) on defence. The USA actually spends 3.61% on defence; poor and impoverished Greece spends 2.38%; the UK manages to spend Continue reading

A Simple Guide to the Action in Libya

According to the West, they intervened in the Libyan civil war because of grave concern at the escalation of violence and heavy civilian causalities, gross violations of human rights, torture and summary executions, intimidation of the international media attempting to report these matters, and the need to protect civilians. Those were the prime reasons, set out in Resolution 1973, for NATO’s military intervention.  The bad guys, according to the United Nations, and the perpetrators of these matters, were the Libyan government. Continue reading

Bombing Libya

A number of nations under the NATO umbrella, mainly the United Kingdom and France, supported by the United States of America, are conducting a bombing campaign in Libya, ostensibly to protect Libyan civilians against the excesses of the present Libyan government. The bombing is authorised by a UN resolution authorising all necessary measures. The Libyan government is fighting a rebellion, and there are fears that in the course of putting the rebellion down, the Libyan government will injure and kill many people, including people who are not fighting. Continue reading