Here is the main item on the Respect website tonight. ” Britain’s top soldier, General Sir Richard Dannatt, has become the latest recruit to the anti- war movement, arguing that we should bring the troops home from Iraq as soon as possible.” WHAT UTTER BOLLOCKS!! The first anti-war meeting he walks into I’ll walk out of.

I’ve never been reluctant to express my deep hatred of the British Army and everything it stands for. Anyone who has seen me after the fourth pint will confirm this. You tend to lose sympathy for members of an organisation that habitually spreadeagled you against a wall at rifle point and playfully trained their weapons on you when you were walking along the street and all the other stuff. As far as I’m concerned any Iraqi who wants to blow them up, shoot them or chop their heads off is perfectly entitled to do so.

But this stupid statement really is a liberal bridge too far. What it should say is something along the lines of “leader of highly professional murder machine disagrees with mad prime minister’s war because he’s losing.” If British and American imperialism had managed to subdue Iraq, impose a political settlement or defeat the resistance Dannatt would be all over the TV bragging about their world class professionalism and high ethical standards. Endorsing Dannatt’s comments in this way is a damned disgrace and associating an imperialist thoroughbred like him with the anti-war movement is worse than a lazy bit of writing. This is a row over strategy within the British ruling class. You can’t claim that one of them is “on our side”. It’s suggestive of a willingness to make common ground with these well mannered murderous thugs and utterly miseducates supporters about what attitude to take to these people. Relentless, unconditional, unambiguous hostility being my preferred option, in case I’d left it unclear.I’ll see if I can get someone to raise it at Respect conference tomorrow.

7 responses to “Head of British Army joins anti-war movement!!???”

  1. John Rees’ comments showed a deep concern that the war was a “mistake”, i.e. against the best interests of imperialism. Read like goodwill advice to the Army.Oh no! “Our boys”‘ patriotism has been misled! Those troops should be redeployed somewhere safer.

    Like

  2. Remind me again, Liam. Why are you still in Respect??? Please tell me the ISG had the balls to walk out this weekend …

    Like

  3. Might it just be that Respect have, you know, a sense of humour? I guess that if you see everything through the prism of orthodox Trotskyism then you are going to find such headlines unpalatable. However, the vast majority of anti-war activists are likely to spot the joke in the headline ‘Head of British Army joins anti-war movement’. As for David Broder’s comments – the war was ‘a mistake’ – even from the point of view of the British ruling class and imperialism. The troops should be redeployed somewhere safer – back home in Colchester or wherever.

    Like

  4. The major test for Respect is what comes out of the Fighting Unions conference. That is a chance to re-shape the organisation. The rhetoric about how brilliant everything is and the peculiar idea that coalitions rather than parties contest for power are just features of the landscape. What will be decisive is if an influx of trade unionists and socialists find Respect a viable option after the conference.Sorry Snowball. The British Labour Movement has a very squalid history of being very forgiving of its imperialist murder machine. The joke just goes over my head or maybe I’m especially biased. But it’s a bias shared by everyone I know whose town has been occupied by the British army.

    Like

  5. I’m kinda with Snowball here. STW is using the divisions in the ruling class to try and build the anti-war movement. Good on’em. I don’t think this means concessions to the state or the ruling class. The possibility of the general, maybe accompanied by a platoon of RMC or marines with their own placards on the next anti-war demo seems limited, but i’m sure it’d mean a tidier section of the march and they could give some tips to those who like faux-marines marching songs. And if he turns up on a platform with Galloway at some big rally maybe for once there would be time for questions about his precise role in Northern Ireland. Still think of the publicity….

    Like

  6. Respect’s sense of humour must be pretty ironic, given how the sentiment of the headline also pervaded Galloway and Rees’ comments.Maybe the war was a mistake for imperialism, but I don’t think that’s an argument to be posed prominently by Marxists, any more than we’d have said “no to top up fees, since it’ll make the government more unpopular”

    Like

  7. Don’t we work with Military Families against the War despite the fact that many of the members have a different analysis to socialists.I don’t think that either StWC or Respect are endorsing the Head of the British army or that he will be invited onto Respect platforms. I think they are merely highlighting that a high profile figure has turned against the war.It is incredibly significant when a figure so high in the establishment and the military makes a statement calling for the troops to leave soon, and says that the troops are exacerbating the security problem. It is in fact unprecedented.It is also incredibly damaging to Blair when figures from the establishment break from him, whether cabinet ministers or the head of the army.Surely this happened during the Vietnam War with the leak of “the pentagon papers”. It was a sign of the presure of the Vietnamese Resistance & the US anti-war movement that it was able to start to break off sections of the establishmentAdam J

    Like

Leave a reply to Dave Cancel reply

Trending