Should The Eu Get Involved In Such Savagery?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/eu-expected-send-troops-central-african-republic-1431757

[Gromit]

AOG

You should tell the British Army. They areunder the belief that Peacekeeping is one of their primary functions. They even boast they are good at it.

// The British Army is actively engaged in operational duties across the globe. The work we do ranges from peacekeeping to providing humanitarian aid, from enforcing anti-terrorism measures to helping combat the international drugs trade. //

http://www.army.mod.uk/operations-deployments/operations-deployments.aspx

--------



// The UK is a contributor to UN peacekeeping operations around the world. As of February 2012, the UK was contributing a total of 283 personnel to the following missions :

United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the DR Congo (MONUSCO),
UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) and
UN Mission in the Sudan (UNMISS).
Source: UN Peacekeeping, Monthly Summary of Contributors of Military and Civilian Personnel

Support to European Union peace operations

European Union Police Mission (EUPM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina: As of 18 September 2009, the UK was contributing eight personnel to EUPM. The goal of the mission is to support the police reform process and to continue to develop and consolidate local capacity and regional cooperation in the fight against organised crime. //

http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/peace_operations.php?id_state=183

[New Judge]

Yes all very fine, Gromit.

I was simply trying to demonstrate that we cannot "keep out of the conflict" and "not stand idly by". The two are mutually exclusive.

Whatever we do if we enter that country, we have become involved in the conflict. We cannot simply go there and say “If you’d be so kind, chaps, we just want to make sure that women, children and innocent bystanders are not being slaughtered so we’d just like to get them out the way, if it’s all the same to you”. It doesn’t quite work like that. Your suggestion that it does is every bit as crappy as my pub analogy. As soon as we interfere one side or the other (or probably both) will start shooting at our troops.

Conflicts such as these are rife, not only in Africa but elsewhere across the globe. We cannot police them all and there is no reason why we should try.

But will still return to my original point. The EU has no mandate from the British people to commit UK troops to such conflicts and if we are to interfere it should be a matter for the Westminster Parliament to determine.

[browntrout]

Gromit,

Fairs fair, you did rather shoot yourself in the foot didn't you. do nothing/do something aren't very compatible are they. have the grace to admit you made a bit of a boo boo.

[Gromit]

// do nothing/do something aren't very compatible are they. //

Yes they are. The UK military were heavily involved in a peace keeping in the former Yugoslavia. They performed their function well, but that was not taking sides or fighting for anyone, it was a humanitarian mission.

http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/former-yugoslavia-and-the-role-of-british-forces

// have the grace to admit you made a bit of a boo boo. //

Nah. No boo boo made.

[browntrout]

So they were doing something in Yugoslavia, they weren't doing nothing.

[askyourgran]

Why do we have to get involved like an avenging angel all over the world? What is the UN Peacekeeping force for? It is an endless chore policing all these war torn places. It's gone on for years and will continue to do so until they all kill each other. Leave them to it.

[Gromit]

Browntrout

Where have I said we should do nothing?

[emmie]

UN peacekeeping forces should go on, let us stay out of this, we nor the Americans can afford to be the world's policemen

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// They performed their function well, but that was not taking sides or fighting for anyone, it was a humanitarian mission. ///

All right if you say so,

*** However, the weakness of the UN mandate was highlighted following the Srebrenica massacre of 1995, where UN peacekeepers were left helpless under the limited terms of their mandate to halt the unfolding slaughter of Muslims. ***

*** The UN proved unable to act, and NATO threats against Serbia, led by President Slobodan Milosevic, were ignored. In March 1999, the Organisation began an air campaign against Serbia. ***

*** The air strikes themselves proved highly controversial, with NATO forces launching attacks within Serbia itself and killing many
civilians. ***

[Gromit]

AOG,
The Srebrenica massacre had nothing to do with the British. It is a slur on our armed forces that you suggest it was our failure. Please read the link below and educate yourself, and maybe you might aplogise to our troops for your slander.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23986063

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// The Srebrenica massacre had nothing to do with the British. It is a slur on our armed forces that you suggest it was our failure. ///

Perhaps it is you who should apologise to me for your slander towards me, since I never suggested it was our armed forces failure?

Those excerpts that I used were taken from the link that you yourself provided, so read it and educate yourself,

[Gromit]

AOG
I wrote:
// The UK military were heavily involved in a peace keeping in the former Yugoslavia. They performed their function well //

And you wrote in reply:
// the weakness of the UN mandate was highlighted following the Srebrenica massacre of 1995 //

That was an attempt to belittle the mission and therefore the British effort. Otherwise, there was no point in posting it.