Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

  1.  
    Posted By: Angushttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/09/dozens-dead-in-yemen-as-bus-carrying-children-hit-by-airstrike-icrc

    Non interference in a soveriegn state.


    “We’ve said this before and we are saying it again: parties to the conflict are obliged to do everything possible to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure. This is not a voluntary commitment, it is mandatory on all belligerents,” Lise Grande, the UN’s Yemen humanitarian coordinator, said on Thursday. “So many people have died in Yemen – this conflict has to stop.”


    ... or I'll stomp my feet and hold my breath until I turn blue....
    •  
      CommentAuthormaryyugo
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2018
     
    How do you explain this shit to Neptunians in a first contact scenario?


    Same way they explain their spring festival in which they hold contests with electronic games similar to chess. The lowest scoring individual at the end of the festival is slaughtered and eaten by the other participants.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2018
     
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2018 edited
     
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-09/trump-stays-publicly-mum-as-saudi-arabia-canada-tensions-rise

    U.S. officials believe Prince Mohammed thinks he has license from the U.S. to confront Canada, exploiting perceived tension between Washington and Ottawa over trade that emerged at the end of a Group of Seven summit in June. ...The Saudis may be attempting to capitalize on the rift, believing Trump would be unlikely to come down hard in defense of an ally who has fallen out of favor, the U.S. official said. So far, that calculation appears to be correct.

    The U.S.’s silence has been mirrored by other key Canadian allies, including the U.K.

    The relative U.S. silence on the issue has been noticed in Ottawa. The American response is “a glimpse of what the world looks like without the U.S. advocating for human rights...”

    •  
      CommentAuthorpcstru
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2018
     
    Posted By: AngusThe U.S.’s silence has been mirrored by other key Canadian allies, including the U.K.

    Our politicians seem more intent on insulting how allegedly abused women look like bank robbers or, ha ha, a post box. It's a bit much to think they might publicly admonish in any way their Saudi pals who insist their women dress just like that and who currently seem to be busy blowing up buses filled with school children, quite possibly with weapons we have sold them.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 11th 2018
     
    •  
      CommentAuthorDuracell
    • CommentTimeAug 11th 2018
     
    @Angus: FWIW, from The Paper of Record in this country: The Irish Times view on the Saudi-Canadian row: Stand with Ottawa
    •  
      CommentAuthoraber0der
    • CommentTimeAug 11th 2018
     
    I think everyone except their governments think it's the right thing to stand with Canada.
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Posted By: AngusJunior says:
    Canadians have always expected our government to speak strongly, firmly, clearly and politely about the need to respect human rights at home and around the world ... We will continue to stand up for Canadian values and indeed for universal values and human rights at any occasion.”

    “That is something I will always do,”

    He said, whilst signing off the delivery of 900 armoured vehicles (including 119 heavy assault class), to Saudi Arabia.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Big issue that one, long before this kerfuffle. It was the Conservatives who wrote the deal. The question for the Liberals was whether we could afford to cancel it. Right now I'm glad not to own stock in General Dynamics.
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Posted By: AngusRight now I'm glad not to own stock in General Dynamics

    Doesn't sound like the thing you'd want to invest in. However your pension fund might well have....
  2.  
    The irony, of course, is that those vehicles are designed for, and will be used for, suppressing the civilian population ... mostly of KSA.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Nope (silent snigger). They were sold under the condition that they must never be used against the population of Saudi Arabia. The issue came up a little while ago in connection with the Shia militancy in eastern Saudi. It was investigated by us but no evidence was found of a breach of the contract.
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018 edited
     
    So then they must be for invading other countries, right? If you can't use them at home, where else you gonna use them?

    Last time I checked nobody was threatening to invade KSA, so they can't be purely for defense of the regime -- unless to defend it from internal threats.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinSo then they must be for invading other countries, right? If you can't use them at home, where else you gonna use them?

    Last time I checked nobody was threatening to invade KSA, so they can't be purely for defense of the regime -- unless to defend it from internal threats.


    Hence my silent snigger. You are correct that the Gurkha, unlike the LAV III (which we sold to the US and became the Stryker), is a police vehicle. I think the Canadian Government may well cancel the deal - it's a great opportunity for the Liberals to do some value signalling. Unfortunately, in the current trade situation, I'm not sure that they will have the confidence to do it.
  3.  
    Maybe the Saudis will just take a page from the extended Trump doctrine and define anyone, internal or otherwise, who criticises the regime as "non-Saudi populations". Then it's OK to use the armoured vehickels agin'em.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    We would be very cross.
  4.  
    I guess you could always suspend exports of the Golden Elixir in retaliation.
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinSo then they must be for invading other countries, right?

    You've got to assume the "heavy assault vehicles" can only be for use on some Yemenis....
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2018
     
    Posted By: BigOilRep
    Posted By: AngusJunior says:
    Canadians have always expected our government to speak strongly, firmly, clearly and politely about the need to respect human rights at home and around the world ... We will continue to stand up for Canadian values and indeed for universal values and human rights at any occasion.”

    “That is something I will always do,”

    He said, whilst signing off the delivery of 900 armoured vehicles (including 119 heavy assault class), to Saudi Arabia.


    I looked into that. As far as I can determine, the exact number of vehicles has not been released.
    The full number of combat vehicles Canada will sell to the Saudis has never been released – some arms trade experts estimate it could be in the thousands – but a French municipal official told The Globe and Mail on Wednesday the transaction CMI is involved with concerns about 700.


    However I have to admit I misspoke myself. That contract is indeed for the LAV III Kodiak, (US "Stryker") and not the Gurkha police vehicle. (Naturally - otherwise why would we need a promise it wouldn't be used against Saudi civilians?)