Not as big as the one he gets when the GT hits his doormat.

Are we really going to fall for this con trick again?

I mean, Assad is a pretty ty guy but there's nothing new here. Once again the BBC and the usual crop of major domestic news outlets are playing their roles of war propagandists. The Beeb has been running front page, position one stories on Syria for months whilst any number of atrocities are taking place in other parts of the world.

Most likely to have an impact on the west, laudable as it is to be concerned at atrocities being carried out with machetes on some remote border in Africa or South America, it is not hurting our national interests as the politicians see it.

I'm pretty sure he didn't get one at the thought of you.

It would have been more likely to be over you.

Why?

Some further thoughts.

• What you do do is to support, if possible, any opposition that you can find evidence is representative of the bulk of the people. And you do it in terms of what [ithey[/i ask.

So for instance, there are trades unions in Europe that are providing support, as asked for, by Zimbawean unions. These things make a difference. But they're not 'sexy' and headline-making. And they are based on not just responding to anyone asking for anything, but involve groups with provable mass support, and not, say, providing arms. I mentioned Zimbabwe – where the unions and progressive organisations asked for union movement in the UK, and this has been very active (as asked) in supporting the campaign on sanitary protection for women.

Now that in itself might sound really rather strange, but rlhererl is some more information on this quite specific issue. It might not seem obviously linked to the struggle in that country for real democracy and against Mugabe, but it is.

• You also have to try to be consistent – and to have an ethical approach to foreign policy (as we were promised but never given, by New Labour. So for instance, you don't give bleedin' recruitment gifts to the likes of al-Queda and its ilk by attacking the likes of Iraq (which you previously supported) and ignoring the behaviour of the state of Israel. And to say that Israel has behaved appallingly is NOT a sign of support for Islamic fundamentalism and it is NOT anti-semitism.

• You stop thinking in the shortest term possible. So for instance, the 'threat' in Afghanistan (and elsewhere within the Islamic world) might have been reduced at this point in time, but we have NOT eradicated it; it will almost certainly emerge again. And in the process of reaching this stage, we have wasted countless lives on both sides.

What are our "national interests"?

Nah, contrary to socialists (who get very excited about the prospect of stealing from the rich in order to give to the government - as if David Cameron really needs the extra money) those of us on the political right dont get turned on by specific policies.

Mintball, I just spoke with my girlfriend, who is Ukrainian, about your affinity for dictators and she reckons that if you ever lived under a tyrant, as she and her family have, then perhaps you wouldnt be so blase about their autocratic rule and brutal leadership. She firmly supports action to help any people in the world oppressed by tyrants.

I thought she was Zimbabwean?

It's a bit much to talk about Dally like that, oh well, at least you've all moved out of his house now, eh?

Its one of those johnny-foreigner places that are hard to spell.

But not for me. Mind you any country that renames a noble place like Wankie as Hwange hasn't got a clue.