Re: I feel depressed because of war 2

I get so sad , and also can’t stop thinking about it. I can’t ignore the fact that they are suffering.

The solution to feeling sad is action.

How are you going to stop war in the world?  You can’t it’s impossible.  You can stay as positive as you want its not going to stop war.

There have been, over the past few centuries, many treaties which have defined and redefined what is and is not permitted in a war.  We’ve moved on a long way from the massive horrific hack-people-to-death battles of the middle ages that in a couple of days could kill a significant percentage of a country’s men.

  • All sorts of tactics and weapons have been banned because of their cruelty or long term effects.
  • Rules have come in about targeting civilians and what is permitted by those in uniform and what is forbidden by those who are not.
  • The law has changed around much of the world regarding conscription; it is no longer legal to force someone to fight and kill others if it is against their conscience to kill.

So, there have been many changes made to violent conflict.

There have also been changes to prevent conflict, such as:

  • The formation of the EU which arose from a treaty designed to prevent another war between France, Italy and German.
  • International courts have been set up on every continent to prosecute those who break these treaties and laws.
  • The League of Nations and then the United Nations were formed to provide somewhere for communication to occur so war can be avoided.

So, there have been changes made to prevent conflict.  These have all happened because people have been active and made them happen.

I don’t think violent conflict will ever be eliminated. But we can continue to prevent it, reduce it, constrain it and clean up after it to minimise its impact.

St Andrews University open day, pre-research

I’m in St Andrews in Scotland today to see what the town is like.  Tomorrow is the St Andrews University post-graduate open day.  The university has an excellent reputation for peace studies so it needed to go on my shopping list, despite it looking too expensive with too few work prospects and, therefore, an unrealistic option.

We’re staying at The Inn at Lathones, a very comfortable and welcoming hotel just outside St Andrews.  They kept the restaurant open for us when we arrived quite late last night and the dinner was excellent.  So was breakfast this morning.  The staff are great and, as every visit to Scotland has confirmed to me, the Scots are friendly and generous people.

The wander round the town was interesting.  It is obviously a university & tourism & golf town.

I stumbled across Student Accommodation Services by accident, popped in and they could not have been more helpful.  Lots of information and advice and a map of the town.

I had an excellent pint and a couple of free tasters in The Central in Market Street, a Victorian boozer with an excellent atmosphere and surroundings.

We picked up some bits for Christmas and gizzits for people in the friendly shops.  I got speculative costs from the letting agents for various forms of private accommodation of various sizes (although Premier Lettings was a bit snooty and unhelpful, warning me it was a bit expensive and not even wanting to give me a business card when I asked).

A bit disappointed the public loo was 30p and I had no change.  Also, I tried to buy a free bookmark in the Salvation Army shop for 20p so I could get some change, but they said it had no code on the till so could not take my money.  So, back to the pub to use theirs, and make a booking for dinner.

Then I saw the university’s Student Careers office.  I had to pop in.

When I first expressed an interest in working in the peace sector, one of the very first things I found was a page on the St Andrews University Careers Service web site about the peace sector.  That page was the start of my research.  I could not resist the opportunity to pop in and have a happy exchange with these good people.

At the desk was a young chap.  I asked if I was in the right place for student careers advice.  He sat back in his chair as if avoiding a leper, pulled a face as if encountering a blocked toilet and said:

Yes.  This is for students only.  The Job Centre is over that way“, flicking his hand in the general direction of ‘away’ like a dowager duchess dismissing a beggar.

I was at a loss for words.  I had been dismissed and was expected to depart from his presence at once.

The arrogant, stuck-up, public-school, elitist prick had, in a few words, managed to undo an awful lot of good impression created by the town.  I felt embarrassed and not posh enough to be in this town of big expensive cars and daughters of rich daddies.  Suddenly the attitude in Premier Lettings explained itself, the 30p for a wee, the types of shops (no mobile ‘phone or 99p shops here!, just a M&S Food Hall the size of most supermarkets elsewhere), the inflated prices of everything.  However, the caff with the sign “Kate met Wills in here” still seemed tawdry.

Is this a good university?  Or merely an expensive one?  They are not the same thing.  Right now, it feels all fur coat and no knickers.   Tomorrow, we shall see what the academic side is like.

Update:  we went back into town for dinner.  At the table next to us were three men.  One was saying to one of the others (amongst other, similar comments):

  • “We turned down 50 students who wanted to learn this shit.”
  • “I’ve brought you all the way up here to convince you you already have this job.”
  • “I already know who is getting the post doc places.  Now it is a matter of convincing them to apply.”
  • “I need to see your CV so I can tell you what the Master wants to see in it.”
  • “Make sure you tell them you have another job offer.  It tells them you are in demand.”

Killing for Christ

Personally, my main concerns over starting wars are the financial and social costs and the subsequent consequences from a desire for revenge.  Lately, I have been spending more time with people who object from a conscientious objective, sometimes from a religious viewpoint.  I have also been exposed to a forum where I regularly hear “people with no religion have no moral compass“.

I do not see there is necessarily a link between a care for humanity and adherence to a religion.  I shall explain.

When gathering evidence that argues against capital punishment, I was surprised at how many American Christian Baptist groups demand the death penalty because “it is God’s will according to the Bible“.  Funny that, because I thought the 6th commandment to not kill, and the subsequent teachings of Jesus in the Gospels to turn the other cheek and forgive, were supposed to take precedence over the Old Testament’s millennia-old verbal story traditions of nomadic desert tribes-people.

That made me contemplate the “you need religion to have morals” claim since some Christians are saying killing people is good, right and proper because it is what God wants.  But other Christians are saying they think the teachings say it is always wrong (which was my interpretation from reading them, too).

But I think learning about a variety of religions and their pros and cons is helpful and informative.  It tells you about the ground they have covered and what to think about.  It also protects one from the more predatory organisations.

If I were writing about political systems and claimed “absolute power corrupts absolutely“, few would disagree and most would sagely nod their heads and agree it has been proven time and time again through history.

But when you have any form of organised religion that says “Do exactly what we say” and “Think what we tell you to think” combined with “It is a sin to read the scriptures of others” and “Only we tell the truth“, it will always go wrong.  Organised religions are run by people and absolute power corrupts absolutely – we know that from history.  Giving them absolute power over your behaviour is naïve or foolish.

This is why I worry about people who operate in such organisations and demand people follow them blindly.  What kind of person wants that kind of power over others, and why do they want it?  Why are they attracted to that role, or create it for themselves, and why enforce it so thoroughly?  Scary people!

Then I worry about those who specifically promote such religions to vulnerable people: the homeless, refugees and students who are living away from home for the first time and who may be spiritually lost, home-sick or lonely.  Why are people who want absolute power over others so keen to target people who are already in turmoil?  Sounds like abusers looking for easy victims to me.

That is why I get so cross with people advertising or promoting the Mormons, the 7th Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and now the Revival Fellowship too.  Relatively new organisations who demand total blind adherence to their teachings and rejection of all other beliefs such that their members are forbidden to even find out about them.  They all typically have ‘scriptures’ that have been amended many, many times, they have false end-of-the-world predictions and a history of turmoil in their leadership as different power nuts fight for control over their followers.  Organisations defending young earth creationism, faith healing, evidence of aliens or that Jesus went to America.

It is also why I would always advocate to someone feeling a need for spiritual guidance to always shop around.  You wouldn’t buy a house or a car without looking at a few first, so why commit your immortal soul (if such a thing exists) to the first Honest John dealer (“Honest John, Honest John, the others are a con!“) who approaches you?  And remember, if they are reaching out to you, it is because you have something they want, not because they have something to give away.  If you are being approached in the street or online to “open your mind” and accept their teachings blindly and reject things that most of the rest of the world believe, then you can be sure you are being conned – all cold callers and spammers are just trying to get something from you and that includes those promoting too-good-to-be-true “religions” too.

Find out about a variety of big religions and faith systems – both with and without gods – what they stand for, their history, what is involved, what the criticisms are.  Get a feel for what is right, honest, decent and true.  Become wise enough to spot the outdated, the inappropriate and, sadly, the liars hiding amongst them.

I did that and came out the other side as a confirmed atheist.  You may come to a different conclusion.  But either way, you’ll have worked out for yourself a pretty good idea of what you think is right or wrong.

More Killing for Christ: bombers, Catholic revenge on Protestants, black-policeman-killing survivalists, their own membership, lynchings, migrants, death penalty and anti-peace!   And sometimes, a religion can be very wrong indeed.

Re: I feel depressed because of war

A discussion on the forum of The Student Room started like this:


[QUOTE=PrincessZara;60094763] I can’t stop thinking about what children must be going through in their war-torn countries and witnessing their parents shot and stuff. All these graphical images/videos on Facebook and it all makes me sad  🙁 They were born in the wrong place at the wrong time they don’t deserve to go through all this. I can’t stop over-thinking and getting all sad and stuff. I try to avoid news and facebook and sh*t but that’s not helping :/ [/QUOTE]


There are things one can do.  Here is the reply from yours truly:


[QUOTE=PrincessZara;60095245] It’s impossible for the an average person to change the world. [/QUOTE]
It is that belief that makes you feel depressed about it. But that belief is not entirely accurate. Every change that has ever occurred started with someone thinking “I want to do something about this“.

[QUOTE=PrincessZara;60095325] No, I’m not going to sit back and watch people die [/QUOTE]
Good. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing.

You could support Doctors Without Borders / Médecins Sans Frontières. They help the victims of war (amongst others) and, given they’ve just had two hospitals destroyed by airstrikes lately, they could do with some support. (Wouldn’t it be nice if the USA had said “Oops. We’re not taking responsibility, but how much $$$ do you need to replace that hospital?“)

You might want to learn more about The Movement for the Abolition of War. They are an organisation of volunteers with a huge dream trying to make a huge difference. Their web site has links to lots of similar organisations.

War Resisters’ International are a pacifist activist group. Perhaps you would be proud to be a War Resister. They are active in all sorts of areas to try to prevent violence and promote peaceful alternatives.

You may be more interested in the Peace Pledge Union. Would you sign a peace pledge to ‘renounce war and never again to support another‘?

If you want to not pay for war, there is a Peace Tax bill going before the government next year, which, if accepted, would mean you can say you want your tax money that would have gone on military activity (about 10%) to go on peace-making work instead. Conscience Taxes for Peace not War are leading on this. Writing to your MP to say you support this would help. There’s a news article about the bill here.

Conscience and Peace Tax International is UK based but campaigns globally for the right to legally object to paying for armaments or war preparation.

There are numerous religions groups too, if you are that way inclined, not just Anglican but especially the Quakers.

Do any of those float your boat?

Spam trap

I seem to have created a spam trap, or, at least, most if it is falling into a black hole.

My preferred spam tool was a Captcha tool that made you rotate an image and only when it was lined up could you post a comment.  That stopped working and would not any comments through so I had to disable it.  As soon as I did so, Woosh! the comment spam starts reappearing.

Most of it gets created against one specific post, for some reason.  Anyway, I had an idea.  I created that post again and gave it a different permalink.  A redirection  from the old permalink to the new was automagically created by WordPress, although I have no idea how.

Now the copy of the page appears but the original version does not.  However, the spam is being posted to the original page; presumably because they are going direct to the /id=nnn link rather than the permalink.

Rather than delete the page and risk the spammers picking a new one to post their spam to, I’ll just leave it there.

What I need now is a WordPress plugin that says “For any comment posted on this page, delete it and blacklist the IP address”.  That would turn my spam black hole into a honeytrap.

NATO has alienated the Afghan people by excessive reliance on air strikes that have caused high civilian casualties

Whoosh!  Boom!  Ha, ha!  We killed loads of insurgents!  Oh, weren’t they?  We’ll have a full inquiry.  Ooh, look, here’s some more!  Whoosh!  Boom!

I started putting together a list of the most serious incidents in Afghanistan where coalition forces have targeted and killed civilians.  I still have about a score of tabs open in my browser each listing different incidents.  This is some of the highlights lowlights.

July 2008: A US air strike killed 47 civilians, including 39 women and children, as they were travelling to a wedding in Afghanistan, an official inquiry found today. The bride was among the dead.  The US military initially denied any civilians had been killed.

2008: The Red Cross said 250 people had been killed or wounded in five days of military action and militant attacks in the past week.  The UN said that nearly 700 Afghan civilians had lost their lives in 2008 – about two-thirds in militant attacks and about 255 in military operations.

September 2009: NATO airstrikes kill villagers syphoning fuel from two abandoned petrol tankers.  NATO’s International Security and Assistance Force discounted reports that civilians were among the dead.  “After assessing that only insurgents were in the area, the local ISAF commander ordered an air strike, which destroyed the fuel trucks, and a large number of insurgents were reportedly killed and injured.”  Whoopsie – made up fibs.  “90 people were dead, but that number included senior Taliban militants.”  Whoopsie, more fibs.  “Local people are telling me 130 people have been killed.”  And finally, “NATO missiles wiped out much of the village of Omar Kheil.”  Whoopsie indeed.

May 2011: Two homes were bombed supposedly being used as a base, killing 14 civilians, including up to 12 children.  NATO later apologies for calling in an airstrike on “a residential compound”.

2012: The UN mission in Afghanistan said 83 civilians were killed and 46 wounded in aerial attacks by international military forces in the first half of 2012.

June 2012:   The US-led military coalition says it will only use airstrikes as a self-defence weapon of last resort for troops and would avoid hitting structures that could house civilians.  That followed a bombardment that killed 18 civilians celebrating a wedding in eastern Logar province, which drew an apology from the American commander.

February 2013: The number of civilian casualties blamed on allied forces decreased by 46 percent, with 316 killed and 271 wounded in 2012.  Most of those were killed in NATO airstrikes, although that number, too, dropped by nearly half last year to 126, including 51 children.  The death of civilians in military operations, particularly in airstrikes, has been among a major source of acrimony between Karzai’s government and foreign forces.

March 2013: A NATO helicopter killed two children and wounded eight civilians during an attack on Taliban fighters.  The helicopter opened fire as it supported Afghan soldiers near the town of Ghazni despite president Hamid Karzai forbidding troops to call for foreign air support.

April 2013: Figures are released saying that between 2006 and 2012, 10,737 civilians were killed by anti-government forces in Afghanistan, and 3,436 by pro-government forces and 2,006 not known.  So between 21% and 34% were killed by ‘friendly fire’.  This is by air and ground troops.  Messy, a civil war, isn’t it?

November 2013: A letter from US president Barack Obama said the US had already “redoubled our efforts to ensure that Afghan homes are respected by our forces” and continued to “make every effort to respect the sanctity and dignity of Afghans in their homes and in their daily lives, just as we do for our own citizens“.

November 2013: The number of civilian deaths from airstrikes fell by more than one third in the first half of this year, but around 50 people were killed, according to United Nations statistics. Overall, the Taliban and other insurgent groups were responsible for three-quarters of civilian casualties.  [That’s progress.  In 2008 one third of civilian deaths were ‘collateral damage’, by 2013 it was only one in four ‘accidental’ innocent civilian deaths by the coalition.]

December 2014: An airstrike by coalition forces killed three Afghan villagers who were “heavily armed” but not part of the Taliban insurgency.  The governor of eastern Logar province said the coalition had told local authorities the dead were Taliban insurgents, but that villagers said the dead were civilians protecting their land from nomads.

October 2015: Barack Obama promises full probe into suspected US airstrike on Kunduz hospital.  Blah, blah, blah.  Fourteen years of airstrikes killing civilians and fourteen years of “The Department of Defense has launched a full investigation“.  In the UK we call that a ‘cover-up’.  It should take 20 minutes to find out who is the commander in that area, ask who was the officer on duty, ask who ordered the airstrikes and then ask them why.  It was supposed to be “jaw-jaw instead of war-war” not “jaw-jaw so we can carry on with war-war”.

NATO has alienated the Afghan people by excessive reliance on air strikes that have caused high civilian casualties.
General Stanley McChrystal, USA commander in Afghanistan

More airstrikes against civilians

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: airstrikes kill civilians.  It is what they are designed to do: destroy infrastructure that is operated mostly by civilians.

I hadn’t got as far as writing about what Russia were up to in Syria and why the UK government is so cross about it (it’s because fighters trained by us were targeted and we may have special forces embedded with them) before NATO destroyed a hospital in the middle of the night in Afghanistan.  Médecins Sans Frontières personnel were killed as were patients.

I am always amazed by the work of Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) personnel.  Imagine doing all those years in university studying to be a doctor or even a surgeon and then, instead of going off to do a job that pays very well indeed, going to some hell-hole and making a difference to people’s lives.  It is an incredibly generous gift they make of their time, comfort, skills and earning potential.  When the government says you shouldn’t go somewhere on holiday because of disease or war, that is where they go.  As an organisation they were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1999 for their humanitarian work around the world.

They do amazing work under incredible pressures and stress.  For example, here is an account of a trauma hospital having to deal with the effects of local fighting:

By midday our hospital was on the front line, with fighting right outside the gate.  Bullets have come into the hospital, some even through the roof of the intensive care unit.  But despite being in the middle of the fighting, our hospital and staff have been respected and we’ve been able to carry on our work.  We’ve received 296 wounded patients, including 64 children.  Most have gunshot wounds from being caught in the crossfire.  The hospital has been completely full of patients.  We normally have a capacity of 92 beds, but we expanded immediately and increased the number of beds to 150.  There have been patients in the offices, in the examination rooms, and being stabilised on mattresses on the floor.
Dr Masood Nasim

Nine Médecins Sans Frontières personnel were killed in the NATO airstrike and 19 more wounded, along with 18 others.

The airstrike was against the trauma hospital being described above.

In the last five days this hospital in Kabul had treated 394 people in near front-line conditions.  In about 75 minutes, the six waves of bombs in the airstrike caused 46 more and prevented the treatment of future casualties by gutting the buildings; they were still burning in morning.

What a marvellous night’s work, bringing peace and hope to the region, uniting people of violently contrasting views, bringing people together despite their differences … by bombing and killing civilians.  How much long-term damage has this caused by creating hatred?

Good job here were no boots on the ground.  A soldier might have got hurt, instead of doctors and nurses, and without a hospital, how would they get treatment?

No humanitarian can make war.  And no humanitarian can make peace.  These are political responsibilities, not humanitarian imperatives.
Dr. James Orbinski, Médecins Sans Frontières International Council President

What a terrible waste of those volunteer physicians’ lives, the training, the investment society had made in them, the funding and support that was given to enable them to help others.  Very special people: generous, selfless people who are willing to travel to a war zone to help complete strangers.  How must their friends, families and colleagues at home feel?  Every civilian death from an airstrike is a tragedy, but these are amplified: these were people who saved other people.  How many casualties will now die or be crippled because these specialists are no longer there to help?

And how must the people of that city feel, living on the front line, now knowing their local hospital has been destroyed?  That nothing is safe, anything could be bombed with no notice in the night.  Little wonder there are so many refugees.

Master’s degree in Peace Studies – what to think about

A useful resource for what to think about when considering doing a master’s degree is the postgrad digital magazine from prospects.ac.uk, here.

It includes tips on:

  • questions to ask at a postgraduate fair (what the universities call their visiting days or open days, I presume) such as “How did last year’s students obtain funding?”
  • that one should apply at least eight months before the course starts
  • how to write a personal statement (whatever one of those is)
  • studying abroad.

As I am shopping around at the moment for where to do such a master’s degree I have lots of questions.

  • Do I want a master’s degree or a research master’s degree?
  • What modules make up the degree?
    • and are they relevant for my career aspirations?
    • and will I learn stuff I want to learn?
    • and will I learn stuff I need to learn?
  • Will an Honours Degree in Philosophy and Psychology qualify me for the course?
  • What are the fees?
  • What funding options are there?
  • Is it “master’s degree” or “masters degree”?
  • How long is it?
    • If it is for two years, does one attend in the second year?
  • Will I be doing a PhD after the master’s degree?
    • Will this master’s degree help m get onto a PhD course?
    • Should I do an MPhil instead?
    • Or maybe an MRes?
  • Will it still be running when I want to do it?
  • How realistic for me is the geographic location?
  • Will it be prestigious?
  • Is the title of the master’s degree a suitable one?
  • How many ECTS credits is it worth?
    • How many ECTS credits do I need / want?

Regarding the ECTS business, ECTS is the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System.  A degree earns credits which are transferable across Europe.  Typically, each year is worth 60 ECTS credits where each credit is about 25 to 30 hours of work.  Most European master’s programmes (‘programmes’ seems to be what they call them) are worth 90-120 ECTS credits.  However, UK master’s degrees only last one year and are—supposedly—worth 180 UK credits where two UK credits are equivalent to one ECTS credit.  However, I can see some UK master’s degrees are worth only 60 ECTS credits rather than 90.  The Open University says two of its credits are equivalent to one ECTS credit, so an OU master’s degree (180 OU credits) is 90 ECTS credits.

University of St Andrews – Masters in Peace and Conflict Studies

I keep seeing University of St Andrews Peace Studies MA being referenced so St Andrews is on my list of potential places to go to do an MA in Peace Studies. It is actually an MPhil or MLitt in Peace and Conflict Studies.  They have a postgraduate open day on 11th November 2015 which is an appropriate day (Remembrance Day) to find out about their peace studies.  That looks like a jolly good idea, especially since we like Edinburgh.

So, how to get there.  Oh.  I thought St Andrews Uni wa in Edinburgh.  It’s not.  By quite a lot.  It’s in a place called… St Andrews.  Which does not have a train station.  That’s not convenient.  And it’s a 90 minute to 2 hour commute from Edinburgh, or an hour from Dundee.

For me to study, requires us to have an income.  We’d have to move to where there are jobs.  I don’t think St Andrews is practical because of the lack of public transport to get there.

Such a shame.