Despite her track record of pontificating on morality, Sayeeda Warsi found herself stumped yesterday when asked about Iran. The peer claimed that she was “not enough of a military expert” to have an opinion on nuking Tehran without warning:

Lord Wigley: My Lords, are there any circumstances whatever where a first strike with nuclear weapons could be morally justifiable?

Baroness Warsi: I am not enough of a military expert

Finding herself in the Foreign Office after being sacked by Cameron as Tory chairman in September, perhaps Warsi will find something she is good at eventually.

  1. What a lazy answer. Morality is essentially a subjective thing. Why people are so scared to put any of themselves into debates concerning it is beyond me… particularly politicians who seem terrified of presenting themselves as being human too.

  2. Full quote: “I am not enough of a military expert to start making these decisions. I do not think that this is a matter for moral judgment; it will be based on any scenario that presents itself at the time, and it would be wrong for me or the Government to speculate at this stage.” Source: [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldhansrd/text/121203-0001.htm].

    Nice of PS to distort this answer. I’m often do not agree with most of what Warsi says publicly, but I really think this is a lot of hot air from PS this time.

  3. Beyond any arguments about distorting the issue, any declaration or act of war is an inherently moral issue. If Warsi said that she did not feel that a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran was a ‘Moral Issue’, I’m at a loss as to think what is.

    That it could even be something the government should dream of is worrying.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *