28th May, on Twitter:
‘Peter Tatchell @PeterTatchell 28 May
In response to latest massacre in #Syria: send #UN peacekeepers, create @UN civilian safe havens & no-fly zones. #FreeSyria #Assad #MENA’
29th May, on Twitter:
‘Peter Tatchell @PeterTatchell 29 May
@bsnews1 @sodhuxley I oppose western intervention. Demilitarisation and universal arms embargo is way forward’.
He just doesn’t seem to get that realistically, a ‘no-fly zone’ is only ever going to be primarily policed/enforced by the USAF and RAF – because the UN doesn’t have its own airforce, and no-one else has the resources to do it – and that as the Pentagon themselves say, it will require weeks of exclusively American bombing that could kill large numbers of civilians. And that to endorse and call for a ‘no-fly zone’ is to ipso facto endorse and call for ‘Western intervention’, and is about as far away from ‘demilitarizing’ the conflict as you can get.
Considering this has been explained to him more than once, it’s bizarre that he keeps making this contradictory, nonsensical and frankly dangerous demand.