They ain't anywhere close to terrified btw. Craig Murray is a crank and he's been many many times more discredited than proven correct. He's not wrong that international law is being ripped up before our eyes, but nobody is enforcing it, so what do we expect?
this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
2 points (57.1% liked)
UK Politics
3918 readers
104 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Honestly it is to be expected. "International law" really is an over statement. "A collection of treaties between nations that depends entirely on the politics of the time." Is a mouthful but the most accurate definition.
As soon as the US disagrees with the rest of the world. One nation that spends more on it's military then the rest of the world combined.
No other nation is really able or willing to challenge them on the subject. Even when the economic and soft power of the US is falling. As it clearly has been lately. There military power means any nation disagreeing with them. Will do so without much fanfare.
Add to that the amount of NATA equipment that is controlled by the US. Even though the UK has a huge number of it's own military patients. The last 50 years has concentrated on US inferstructure to support our forces. As is most of NATO.
It is rather insane to think any western nation can act in a way opposed to the US opinion. Even when the US is unlikely to attack for it. They are very able to shut our forces effectiveness down. Let alone in situations like this were the US power structure is obsessively in support of Israel no matter what they do.
the amount of NATA equipment
Now I want a cream pastry.
Grins. Typing on tablets is a pain. When you are visually impaired.
The lack of physical feelings to the keys makes mistakes absurdly common.
Some form of magnetically adaptable textured display surface is likely a decade or so away. If the commercial interests can be bothered to invest in such ideas.
Can you give evidence for your "crank" assertion and that he's been discredited? I've followed Murray over the last 5 or so years and I've not noticed misinformation. He's pretty much on the other side of things than mainstream political opinion but usually what he asserts tends to be the case. But happy to corrected and informed by evidence.
Crank is hard to define. But go read his subsequent career section
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Murray
He's a crank. Literally stood for parliament as a stand alone candidate. Then advocated for Alba. Recently joined with George Galloway. Was in jail recently. What more do you want on him?
You'll forgive me but that's not evidence of a "crank" (unless "crank" simply refers to anyone who doesn't share your views). You made the assertion that Murray's "been many many times more discredited than proven correct". As I said, I'm happy to have my opinion of Murray changed but you've not provided any evidence other than a Wikipedia page which doesn't seem to show he was "discredited" in the way you think it does. He has some opinions which many people don't share (Salisbury and Starmer come to mind) but, generally, he appears to me to have stood up for some righteous causes (Assange, Palestine, the influence of oligarchs on Brtitish politicians).
To most liberals if you don't regurgitate their discredited talking points you are seen as on the fringe, or extreme, even if your analysis is coherent and borne by events. It's one of the reasons why people on both the right and the left despise liberals.
None of those things scream "crank" to me, other than the association with Galloway, but Murray has stated he has very different politics to him, they just agree on some key issues