Posts by Russell Brown
-
Hard News: In the red zone, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Arguably, they were in ‘motions’…
While there are your puns, Ian, there is hope.
-
New statements from the government:
UN needs to address Syrian crisis - McCully
Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully says the New Zealand Government still wants the United Nations Security Council to be the place where action on the Syrian crisis is resolved.
“The grisly pictures and reports of chemical weapons attacks in recent days have prompted consideration of a range of options in various parts of the world. The New Zealand Government remains committed to the Security Council as the appropriate vehicle to address this crisis. It has a clear legal basis for taking action and a clear responsibility to show leadership,” Mr McCully says.
“It is nearly a year since I used the opportunity of New Zealand’s address to the UN General Assembly to remind the Security Council of its responsibility to agree a course of action to resolve the Syria crisis, and criticised the use of the veto in such circumstances.
“It is clear that international patience with Security Council inaction is wearing thin. We again urge the UNSC to show leadership and to take action against the reported use of chemical weapons.
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is remaining engaged in the exchanges that are taking place. We have a very close interest in information verifying the use of chemical weapons in Syria and in evidence proving who was responsible.
“We have no intention in engaging in speculation or commentary about the way forward. This is a time in which both words and prospective actions should be evaluated with great care.”
Labour Demands Strong UN Action On Syria
Labour has called for strong multilateral action through the United Nations to be taken against the regime in Syria for its use of chemical weapons.
“The use of chemical weapons is totally abhorrent. They indiscriminately kill innocent victims, including children, and condemn them to suffer appalling deaths. Their use is banned by international humanitarian law and is a war crime,” says Labour’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson Phil Goff.
“In the face of strong evidence that the Assad regime has used poison gas against its people no country on the UN Security Council with the power of veto should exercise that power to prevent effective action being taken. New Zealand has always opposed the use of the veto by the major powers.
“Putting vested interests ahead of the urgent need for action against a regime which launches chemical weapons against its own civilians is unacceptable and Russia should think carefully about that. Stopping effective action would rightly draw condemnation from countries across the world.
“A regime which brutalises its people cannot be allowed to do so with impunity.
“Unilateral action involving missile strikes against Syrian military bases might be an understandable reaction. However it is a poor substitute for effective multilateral action to isolate the Assad regime, and implement steps to supervise its replacement and hold it to account for crimes against humanity.
“Quick military fixes do not automatically result in lasting political solutions as recent experience in Iraq and Libya shows. The replacement of a brutal dictatorship with one no less authoritarian or with anarchy is not a solution.
“New Zealand should undertake intense diplomatic efforts to press for a multilateral solution through the UN, however hard that may be,” says Phil Goff.
-
Hard News: This time it's Syria, in reply to Raymond A Francis,
And that is how you would run our foreign policy if you were in control,
sorry Russell I expect better from you than thatFor goodness sake Raymond, there's nothing we can do. We have no relevant military resources. There won't be any ground troops. I don't really support the Greens' tub-thumping for a statement of dissent either.
Like support for people to make their own decisions, support the over throw of despots etc
We've said all the right things about that. But would you have us bowl in even if it meant many more civilian deaths? How exactly would ground troops even know who they were supposed to be shooting at? How do you propose to distinguish a jihadi from a democrat?
I'm resigned to the punitive strikes and hope that they impair the regime without killing many civilians. That's about it at the moment.
-
One more: a house standing proud in a ravaged street. It must be so hard to leave this behind.
-
Hard News: Political Idol, or whatever…, in reply to Sacha,
Like Cunliffe actually rallying a group of party supporters rather than talking about how he could, you mean? Saw how that went down with the Thorndon keyboard warriors..
At the GCSB protest on Queen Street, Cunliffe was there early and visible, with a young electorate crew all in matching red t-shirts. They were smiling. He was the only MP I saw in the crowd, as opposed to on the mic. I think all that is greatly to his credit.
-
Hard News: Political Idol, or whatever…, in reply to James Butler,
And the account is dead now, which suggests to me at least that if it was a troll, it was a genuine one. A satirical troll wouldn’t pack up shop like that.
It's back!
-
This just tweeted by David Cunliffe:
Afternoon all. @CunliffeLeader is a troll and has nothing to do with our campaign. We’re keeping it positive. Thanks.
The account itself has been deleted, raising the possibility that it was in fact the work of an extremely deluded supporter who has finally got the message.
-
Hard News: Political Idol, or whatever…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Gee, thank you for the massive Constitutional man-splain there Rich because nobody’s ever amended or repealed legislation in the 23 years I’ve had the vote. The actual correct answer was the one Grant managed to give without the macho dick-waving.
You can disagree on that, then. Rich’s answer wasn’t a “mansplain” or anything like it. He has precisely the same right as you to advance an opinion here. It wasn’t even addressed to you.
-
Hard News: Political Idol, or whatever…, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
“Fuck you” is the correct answer. A parliament cannot bind it’s successor – Key may have purported to do so by signing up for a 30 year contract, but statutes can always void contracts.
Which is indeed the longhand version of what Cunliffe said. Key's attempt to bind every government for the next three decades was offensive. The unsavoury nature of the doing of the deal made it more so.
-
Hard News: Political Idol, or whatever…, in reply to Alastair Thompson,
So far however it is working like a dream.
It has had the effect of sucking all the oxygen out from what would have been the spectre of John Key basking in his victory over the powerless communists, civil libertarians and their Twitter Chorus.
Look at Bryce Edwards' Politics daily for today. Everyone is talking about it.
