I see we now have a delegation preparing to head to Libya to seek 'compensation' from the Libyan Government for the victims of IRA bombs where the semtex supply could be linked to Libya.

Have I got this bit right? Is there any more to it, that I'm missing?

Does Britain, or it's partner in World-Policing, the US, intend to compensate the victims of atrocities across the planet where weapons they have supplied have been used directly to cause misery for innocents?

Now, I'm guessing that there must have been some international law preventing Libya from selling semtex to the IRA because we all know that Libya is bad and cannot be trusted.

Whilst the UK has come on leaps and bounds in terms of it's involvement / integrity in the Arms-Trade, does anyone honestly think that our past Governments did not sell arms to dictators who would use the items for 'terrorism' purposes, and eventually on British Soldiers once the political wheel had turned some???

Fair enough - seek compensation, but then also GRANT compensation to those who suffered from our profiteering. I suspect the balance sheet may not work out in UK / US interests!

Aaargh, I detest the sickening hypocrisy of politics... but what alternative???

Like you say, both Britain and America have been supplying arms for decades to conflicts around the world and when their not selling enough, just start a war with some tiny backward country they don’t like while claiming them to be a threat. Most likely to use up their stock pile so they can sell more.

Its got more to do with Gordon surviving in his political career, than anything else.

Gordon got shamed into doing it as he was exposed as actually blocking the negotiations behind the scenes.

He doesnt want to upset Libya because they have lots of lovely gas which will make our reliance on Russian Gas reduce.

Although dont think Libya is any better to get into bed with, except they dont have nukes!!

Wasn't Mark Thatcher doing some dodgy arms dealing during the IRA conflict?

The whole question of relations with Libya is minefield with no correct answer, as with North Korea the dynasty at the top is barking mad.

The question of IRA compensation is also a minefield, the IRA was bank rolled mainly by east coast American Democrats.
The flow of money across the Atlantic could have been stopped but it was much too tied to US internal politics.
Also it opens the can of worms as to who exactly gets the compensation The other side in troubles did not get explosives from Lybia but to compensate only IRA victims would exclude the victims of UDF killings.

If you start handing out compensation right left and centre some of the people you compensate will have been involved in terrorism themselves.

Also many IRA killings did not use Libyan supplied explosives or guns ---- if you get shot by an AK47 you get compensation but if you get shot by an US supplied Armalite you don't. The explosive used in the huge 1996 London Doclands truck bomb was of course home made.



[Edited on 7/9/09 by britishtrident]

I worked for Col G in the late 70s at Okba airfield and was there during the 7 day war when everyone on the bases had a brand new AK47's issued , they where like kids with new toys waving them everywhere, in the base CO's office the walls where clad in calendars from many arms suppliers and they listed on them just what they dealt in , none western i might add.

The shops and supermarkets full of Irish produced goods from Nido dried milk to jams, butter linen etc plus concentrated malt we made beer from.

I will say for a dry state they all knew what Johnnie Walker was and tasted like.

Country wise i really liked it and enjoyed my life there, people where ok too, but the secret police a different matter, say the wrong thing or curse at the wrong white car and you could be locked up in a cell for hours with no idea of the time until they let you out and told not to do it again with a smile on there face.

Plus we did have an Ambassador there at that time who threw good parties too.


Mike

now back to those WW2 reparations.....