 |
| Iraq's Regime had gone - but what next? |
Meanwhile, until I find my writings about the Caucasus in the context of the recent Russian-Georgian War here's some stuff I wrote a few years ago about the Wars in Syria and northern Iraq
Having just read about ISIS and their Activities in the last 12 Years it seems some of us are being proved right about the disaster that unfurls in the Region formerly called Arabia and the Levant. Those Paramilitaries GWB went on about - which, then, were factitious - are now there in their 1000s - and while the West tries to evaluate which one might be friendly and those that aren't, all have shown that the Arab Expression "Your Enemies Enemy isn't necessarily your Friend" is right. Even the Iraqi Government recently showed support for Syrian Government Air strikes against recent rebel Activity as it encroached into Iraq. So much for the continued Support the West has had for the insurgency in Syria then as it puts them in conflict with their new Protege, while President Obama has asked for yet another $500M to arm what he hopes would be "Moderate" Forces in the Rebellion. I'm sure some of those Moujahedin in 1980s Afghanistan must have seemed quite moderate when the US did something similar then.
Isn't this Folly and for a Number of Reasons? Firstly; that the Afghan example applies and that today s 'Freedom Fighters' are tomorrows 'Terrorists' - or that the Ebb and Flow of Allegiances in the Region could mean the President being duped into supplying People who could change sides at the Drop of a Keffir. Also, if they are defeated those Weapons are captured - just like the many others that have been - in both Syria and Iraq (the latter having a Squadron of Helicopters appropriated by ISIS when they seized Mosul Airport recently). John Kerry must have seen something similar in Vietnam when those 'Vietnamised' Troops (Soldiers from South Vietnam charged with assuming Army Duty once the US withdrew) collapsed and their Weapons siezed by VC and NVA Troops instead. This is why I'm surprised the President even suggested it - particularly when his Secretary of State for Defence must also realise why Vietnamisation didn't work for the same Reason those Iraqi'ised Troops surrendered as promptly as they did. After almost the same Time-scale (about 3-4 Years) Vietnamised Soldiers realised that the People they pointed their Rifles at were as Vietnamese as they were - those they did so on behalf of weren't. The same applies to the Iraqi Army - with the additional Element of whichever Strand of Islam they subscribe to.
Meanwhile, a Consignment of F16s seem to have got lost in the Post - causing Baghdad to buy Sukhoi Aircraft from Russia and Belorus instead - something Saddam used to do - and while those ,and maybe any other FWhatevernumbers, seem to be mislaid in the Sorting Office maybe they'll continue buying Planes from Saddam s former Ally!
All of this is partially because western Intel insisted on identifying Sunnis and Shia Moslems as potential Friend or Foe Groupings rather than as Iraqis - a Policy we saw the beginnings of in 1990 when GHB tried rallying those Shias of the Basra region into Insurrection against Saddam's Sunni Government, and continued when the recent War raged. The Aim of ISIS is to create a pre-1919 Arabia where Islam (the Caliphate) effectively erases the artificially created Countries of the post WWl Era (Sykes-Piquot). Considering they are a Reaction to the predominantly Shia Government in Baghdad - who were a Reaction to the Sunni Government of Saddam - while Assads Regime in Damascus is a Shia Alawite Sect of Islam - the Allegiances in the region are somewhat Skewed. The West backs the new Iraqi Government and opposes Damascus - thus supports Rebels in Syria - but is against those in Iraq. Iraq's Government supports the Government in Damascus and tacitly opposes Rebels.. All of this suggests that Groupings like ISIS could prove very seductive to a People wearied by War in either Countries and begin to see their Presence as potential to end it in both. Even one of their Regions (where Tikrit is located) has the very evocative Name Salah-ah-Din - from a time when Shia and Sunni Saracens were unified in the 12th-13th Century. Something I'm sure isn't lost on those responsible for their Propaganda. Particularly against the Backdrop of Prisoners being killed like it was the Crusades 800 years ago. It should be remembered that People in Afghanistan, who had suffered 5 years of Civil War after the Soviets withdrew, were relieved when the Taliban finally took control ending the Conflict - even if they might forfeit certain Rights. Who's to say the same wont apply in the Levant as years of War start to make them think Westernisation is more trouble than it's worth?
All of this shows that the recent Wars could prove to be counter-productive in protecting western Interests in Arabia and the Levant - while Israel must wince at the prospect of a unified Islamic Caliphate on their Doorstep.
It also shows that whatever they have now is far more extreme than anything they had before - including the Syrian Government and former Iraqi Regime. In the recent Years of the current Conflicts the myriad Combatants have probably killed, maimed, kidnapped and oppressed as many People on every side as either Government had in rather more Years. Even the formerly maligned Kurds during Saddam's Era haven't escaped the Conflict as they have had to defend themselves (and others fleeing the War) against the Paramilitaries. NATO Turkey has seen its Government severely compromised as the Strain starts to cross its own Borders with Syria and the Kurdish PK begin to seize their chance in the uncertainty. This is why ISIS have had an Ascendancy they otherwise wouldn't have as the Wars gradually wear down the People and any Resolve they might have had to retain any Westernisation, where that 12th-13th Century historical Figure who represented Unification and subsequent Peace, seems more attractive as each Day of the Conflict continues - even in Sunni Islamic Turkey. There have even been mass Executions of POWs not seen since the Massacre of the Saracens at 1190s Acre or those of Refugee Camps in Lebanon..They have seen 12 Years of total War - and like any omnipresent Conflict anything that existed before gradually fades into distant Memory.
What makes it all far more dangerous to the West and Israel is how any previous Paramilitary Activity from the PLO and the late Yassur Arafat were waged from Refugee Camps and the tiny Enclaves of Gaza and the West Bank. These were also Nationalist Conflicts - a territorial Battle for Areas of what used to be called Palestine. ISIS and others have an Islamist Agenda that wouldn't be negotiated at Camp David with Maps and territorial and administerial Agreements, while they now control Areas of the Region rather more substantial and not completely reliant on Funding from other Arabist States. This means they are in a much more powerful Position to export 'Terrorism' to other Islamic Regions and the sort of Activity in the West we used to see in the 1960s-90s by the PLO - but on a wider Scale. Arafat might have been behind those Bombings and Hijackings - but at least he and Rabin could be brought to the Negotiating Table to resolve the Crisis.
Even when it was possible to negotiate about Geography like the British and French did with Faisal there were still mistakes........
Also, I remember how Hostages were returned to the West via Syrian backed Amal in Lebanon - to Assad's Damascus and ultimately their Home Countries. The kidnapping Activities of these Groups in the current Conflict have shown no Intent at all of doing the same - quite the opposite - and while Damascus is compromised as a regional Influence so is the prospect of an acceptable Resolution to any Hostage Scenario. That these have - and will - happen in Areas far larger than the Lebanon merely compounds the Problem.
And no-one has even contemplated the Dilemma surrounding the Millions of Refugees scattered across the Region, who - at some Point - will have to return Home. Home - to what exactly - while it's Luck of the Draw as to who rules which Area each Refugee came from and returns to.
What also makes all of this more dangerous than ever before are things like that and the many other Crises that afflict the Region. Israel have fought their Wars with Arabs and Palestinians many times before - the latter a comparatively small Group of Fighters numbering no more than a few Thousand, while the other Arab Peoples watched. This time - and unlike Yom Kippur in 1973 - if things escalated (and Israel seem to have resorted to the usual Tit for Tat Policy with Gaza at the moment) they won't be fighting either a conventional Army controlled from Cairo, Amman and Damascus or that small Group of Palestinians - but an entire Swathe of potentially 100s of 1000s of increasingly desperate People - all armed - and of all Aramaic Demographics. The biggest Mistake the West can make would be to send yet another Coalition into War - where those 'People' they are there to 'Liberate' might just as readily shoot them as support them.
Whoever it was who thought a Rebellion in Syria might be a good Idea ought to be brought to account for this - while the Iraq Conflict suffered because GWB broke one of the most important Rules of War - don't over-deploy your Army on any second Fronts, which he did - as that 250,000 was split - 125,000 each in Iraq and Afghanistan. This means neither were as effective as they could have been had they just focussed on each objective at a time. Those WMDs might or might not have been there (while it could be argued certain former Vice Presidents probably had the Copies of Invoices from the Sale of any that did - as does France, Britain etc with many conventional Weapons) but how any of this could be decisive when you don't have enough Troops in the Conflict is a Question for him. Apparently, amongst the Weapons ISIS have captured was a SCUD Missile - so, so much for disposing of any of those anyway then. Even then, a SCUD Missile isn't necessarily a WMD (ie; nuclear or biochemical) unless it is tipped with a relevant Warhead. Saddam fired 2 of them at Israel in the 1990 Gulf War - and the conventional Impact was minimal, and more psychological than strategic. It also emphasises the Fact that he didn't have WMD capability because he could have armed and used them in 2003 if he had.
Also, Yitzhak Rabin was killed - not by a Palestinian, or anyone else who might oppose Israel - but by an Israeli (who thought Rabin had made too many Concessions to Arafat) - so the extremist Element in all this isn't just in the Arab Camp and Israel has its own Enemies of Peace too!
What should also be remembered here is that while the 1967 War concluded with the Capture of the Golan Heights and Yom Kippur by the conventional Defeat of a conventional Army (with the usual Announcement of Cessation of Hostilities) any War waged against Israel now won't. Unlike a very small Group of Suicide Bombers from Hamas there are infinitely more of them - and we have seen them do this in their Battles in Iraq and Syria. These Rocket Attacks - launched from Gaza and Southern Lebanon - are limited by the Borders they have with Israel. Now, they could do it from the Syrian Border Region and maybe even Jordan if the Conflict spreads into there too. King Hussein's Government has been regarded by the Islamists as an Enemy and they could make Life very difficult in Amman.
GWBs biggest Error was self-admitted in 2001 when he said how he was going to play one Group off against another - while his under-deployment of Resources showed how he also underestimated how difficult it would be to keep those same Factions from fighting each other long after Saddam was toppled. He broke the Country and Iraqi Society - but couldn't repair it. while the same applied to Syria - but on a much larger Scale as her Russian Allies were prompt in supporting the Government. Suddenly the War reached the Gates of Moscow.
Not sure what George Robertson was doing either when he let Sakashvili loose a few Years ago in the Caucasus. Instead of this he ought to have urged Caution as Secretary General of NATO - but he didn't, thus forfeiting any diplomatic Work via the Kremlin as Putin 'resolved' the Ossetia and Abkazia Crisis in quite predictatble Fashion. Although, for all Putin’s Faults it has to be said it was just as well it was 'concluded' as quickly as it was to prevent South Ossettia and Abkhazia turning into Ingushettia and Chechnya - oeven these being embroiled in a wider - opportunistic Conflict by Grozny. Problem now being those same Chechens are now in control of a Region of Syria - with all that that entails.
(This is where I wish I could access my Piece about the Caucasus being the most dangerous place on Earth - an Analysis of the various Allegiances and enmities in the region).
On the continuing Israel-Palestinian conflict and the contrast..........................
The Difference now is how the Conflict is infinitely bigger than it was since 1948.........and certainly after the Palestinians established Refugee Camps in Lebanon and Jordan. For Years Palestinians had their internecine Skirmishes, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Peoples Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Revolutionary Justice Organisation, more latterly Hamas and the PLO have squabbled - as have Lebanese Groups like Hezbollah and Amal, Abu Nidal and the Druze. Their common Enemy is Israel and her western Allies, but these Groupings are all comparatively small and even unified haven't really done much Damage to the Jewish State.
The Knesset's biggest Dilemma is how they have been manoeuvred into an unenviable Position by Events and while it might be one thing to launch the usual Air strikes on Gaza or even invade Lebanon like they have in the past - it could be something entirely different if they did on any of these new Groupings in Syria and Iraq. Even the IDF can't be everywhere - and they must realise that if anything would unify these Groupings it would be that. There is an unfortunate Resonance with the Crusades - particularly that of the third - as a Caliphate now occupies somewhere called Salah'ah'Din and we have seen a Massacre of Prisoners of War almost as large as Richard lst's mass Execution of Saracens at Acre. There was no Geneva Convention in the 1190s - there seems to be scant regard for it now!
Iraq, before, during and after the Invasion in Maps.....
http://www.packriverpotions.com/iraq/iraq-war-map
For a complete geographical understanding of the current Situation click here..............
http://www.edmaps.com/html/islamic_state_in_maps.html
Spread the Word and share to Facebook, Twitter etc.....
If you enjoyed reading this and want to donate something please do via Visa Card to.....
4658 5875 6540 4012
Or even via Bitcoin to ......
bc1qupwmz20gyf4rj2u6svmug4n3lw6er5m3r0ag2g
Very many thanks!
While People failed to see the strategic disaster that loomed in the Caucasus - the start of what became Cold War ll - they also seem oblivious to how - while Saudi Arabia - that fine example of modern liberal democracy, and Qatar supply people like ISIS and Islamic State the US planning to do same with what they regard as 'moderate' combatants gradually puts them on a proxy war footing with other countries in the region, or at least acrimony. The Islamists might occasionally form alliances with the 'moderates' but they have also fought, as have the Kurds, with elements of all of these - including their continuing spat with Turkey, but what happens if or when Assads government collapses? We then see the onset of a civil war that dwarfs the by-proxy battles that happened in a Lebanon where Shell cases with "Made in (somewhere in the West)" stamped on them strewed the streets of Beirut. There are also Chechen fighters in the conflict - doubtlessly looking for somewhere further afield than Grozny which would raise a few eyebrows in Moscow probably. The potential for organised crime is immense as somewhere that once saw Caravans full of Silk and Spices begins flooding with Heroin from Afghanistan. The Taliban might have stopped heroin production, but this has recommenced in abundance, but before People wrongly think that those producing it are somehow friendly it was pre-Taliban Afghanis who did so, while also resisting the Marxist Policies of Najibullah in the 1970s, 'Communist' yes, but as western as any other Ideology Afghanis have resisted since Khyber.
ReplyDeleteThis implies a conflict that won't end if Assad capitulates and one that could go on for decades. Lebanon has never really repaired itself since 1975 -but this is much bigger.
Meanwhile, as Israel have dubbed Iran the most dangerous country in the world one hopes that there isn't a move in the Knesset to wage war on a country whose land mass would accommodate most of Europe and with a population of something like 80 Million. They ought to not only rebuke Sakashvili for his misadventure in South Ossettia but also the West and NATO for not dissuading his war with the Russians. Many mistakes were made a few years ago - one of the biggest being GWB's "Axis of evil" comment against a Tehran with a comparatively liberal leader struggling to modernise (Ahmed Khatami - who was even endorsed by Kofi Annan for his work) and whose People then elected a former Revolutionary Guard as their new President.
As far as I can figure - about the only decent thing to come from all this could be how the Kurds get something denied to them for Centuries - a Homeland that is rather more substantial than a just another Region of Iraq, Syria and Turkey. I say this in the Context of how the US, France and Britain want to arm the Kurds in their War with the Islamists, and it can't have been missed by those Countries that there has to be some sort of trade off with a People who have fought their own War against Baghdad and Ankhara. While the West wants Kurdish support it should be mentioned that they (the Kurds) were supported by a Damascus wanting to prevent their waging paramilitary War against them. The PK have been active in Turkey for Decades and the Prospect of this continuing hasn't diminished because of the current Conflicts. To ensure that the Kurds don't use those same Weapons against Turkey also shouldn't have been missed by the West - which is why, maybe they should seriously consider the international Recognition of a nation State of Kurdistan as a Caviat against further PK Activity against our Turkish NATO Allies. Turkey has had it own Problems with Islamists in recent Years - probably boosted by the Insurgency in Syria and Iraq - and the gradual Ascendancy of Groupings like ISIS. Not everyone in Turkey supports the progressive Ideas of Kemal Ataturk.
ReplyDeleteWhat is tragic about all this - and shows the Transience of the Politics of the Region is how there wasn't any Enthusiasm to arm the Kurdish People in a Decade when all of that was being done with Saddam in his War with Iran. (who used some of it against the Kurds). What is also telling about it is almost an Admission that what they (the Kurds) are fighting against is far worse than even the Ba'athist Dictator. Something many People thought might happen in an Iraq War that was severely under-resourced. Something like 500,000 were involved in the 1990-91 Coalition - including the myriad Support Personnel - and that was to eject Saddam from Kuwait - not depose the Regime in its own Country and then stabilise it against the inevitable Civil Unrest and Insurgency. Al Qaida's Presence in Iraq before the War was a Figment of GWBs Imagination - now, not only are they an established Fact, there are others there now that are worse than even they are.
(I have to say that there's a certain Irony in the Name ISIS - as - when Islam got established in Egypt one of the first things they did was to de-Pharoise the Country by destroying the Carvings and Statues of the ancient Civilisation.)
Does some of this suggest that the Standard of our Politicians has diminished in recent Years that they couldn't see any of this happening (or at least refused to admit it even if they did?). GHB had the Means to invade Iraq in 1991 but didn't as he would have been in violation of the UN Mandate for the Conflict. It also has to be said that while things seemed to deteriorate in Western Politik things were gradually improving in some of the Arab and North African Regions. Does a Bashar Al Assad modernising the Syrian Economy and floating it on the Worlds Stock Markets sound like someone who would approve of 9/11 for example? Does a Moamar Qaddafi seem like the Pariah he might once have been seen as when he negotiated his Peace with Tony Blair a few Years ago? Even Libya's alleged Involvement in Locherbie hasn't stood the Test of further scientific Investigations. Look at both Countries now to realise the Fallacy of any War-Mongering in certain Corridors of Power. Neither of whose pre-war Incumbents were perfect by liberalist Western Standards - but then those Standards don't apply in those Regions. To assume a 1989 Central and Eastern European Model in the "Arab Spring" is a complete Irrelevance as the former were equally Western in an Aspiration that was kept on hold for 40 Years by the Cold War. Qaddafi was as wary of the Islamists - including his known Disputes with Al Qaida (as a North African he refused to join the Arab League)- as he was any Western Government for example, while even in the lst Cold War Gorbachev warned against Islamic Extremism.
ReplyDeleteI notice how President Obama is trying to both distance himself from the stance taken by his predecessor (Cheyney's stated aim was to depose Assad in Syria) by attempting to differentiate between the extremists - but continuing the policy that led to what we are seeing now. I would say to him that this is a concurrent continu'um to what happened when Georgia was allowed to launch its war in the Caucasus - causing the gradual deterioration in relations with Moscow - leaving all negotiations via them with anyone forfeit. This had very serious implications not just with Tehran but also with Damascus as events began spiralling out of control and we now have the result of several years of brutal War. If they hadn't upset the Russians they might have had potential influence on the Syrian government to begin a gradual process of democratisation. Syria isn't a western country and doesn't have the institutions of administration and democracy you might find in somewhere like Sweden - while it doesn't have similar aspirations that those European countries had in 1989. The Evidence suggests this was once quite possible as Assad was moving towards modernisation. A country whose economy joins the worlds Stock Markets for example is also somewhere that at some point becomes open to negotiation. This has been rendered impossible now.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, if the West wanted to see a more liberalist Syria who do they negotiate with now anyway? They have a government severely weakened by years of war, a hotch potch of warring Opportunists - none of whom have any sort of potential governance in the current climate, others wouldn't even consider any consultation with anyone (the Islamists), and one of whom is a sworn enemy of Moscow (the Chechens).
People say that the majority of Syrians reject the government - so why haven't they taken up arms against them alongside any of the Militias involved, even groups like ISIS? As the War continues they might even begin to realise in the crumbling Wreckage that used to be somewhere like Aleppo that at least the country functioned with Assad rather than what they have now which is somewhere where all semblance of civic life has completely ceased. The War could prove counter-productive in that should the government prevail they might clamp down further than they ever have, or even out-manouvre the West completely by having a policy of liberalisation that says "This is what we were trying anyway, but someone somewhere insisted on the brutal and bloody War that has now finally ended!" This is where People like Putin show how much more astute they are than many might realise, and rather more adroit than many of his western counterparts. Moscow could support the Syrians modernisation process which is something else the West seems to have forfeit.
It should also be remembered that a similar process exists with Israel whose Treaties and agreements with Syria after 1973 and 1982 are with the government and not any of the myriad groups currently fighting it. Also, those FSA Soldiers are the same Soldiers who glowered at Israel in the Golan Heights until the War started, so their enemies enemy isn't necessarily Jerusalem's friend either. What Washington also has to consider is whether they want a genuinely independent FSA government or what many Syrians will see as a mercenary puppet of America. Even if the FSA prevailed how long would it be before we saw a surge of Syrian Nationalism?
Had the West developed its relations with Moscow instead of scotching them a few years ago the potential for something far less tragic might have been realised.
Events in Syria have been lumped in with what has been dubbed "The Arab Spring", which is something of a misnomer, but even if it were anyone knows that a Government or Army however draconian can't survive for long without the support of the People. In Romania the Army realised this and sided with the People within days of the unrest beginning and the Securitae went to its grim work. In Syria this still hasn't happened with a People who haven't even begun a policy of civil disobedience against Assad and start supporting the FSA. This suggests that reports that there is some sort of 100% rejection of the Government are inaccurate and misleading. If after all the years and the considerable weakening of the Administration this still hasn't happened someone somewhere must support it. Ceaucescu was made - in no uncertain terms - to realise just how unpopular he was by a People who, at that stage, didn't know the Army would side with them and took the Risk of an insurrection against the harshest Government in Europe - probably one of in the world, whose ominous omnipresence permeated every sphere of life.
ReplyDeleteWhat President Obama's recent comments (another Washington/Moscow Spat) reveal is just how deep the new Cold War seems to have become. It's the same Obama who - as a Senator - formed part of a Delegation that went to Moscow to discuss the sensible disposal of Nuclear Weapons. It's a pity he couldn't find and reactivate that particular political Contact Book - maybe before the current conflicts started - and begin a process of negotiation that attempts to address the damage done by his predecessor. Even the Pentagon has admitted to the failings of the Iraq conflict - politically, strategically and militarily (something unprecedented in the very narrow timescale since is cessation). This is a considerable development when it compromises the Prestige and Credibility of the worlds most famous military institution.
ReplyDeleteIf their findings are to be taken seriously (and they should be) I find it astonishing that more recent Politicians even considered the opening of yet another Front in what starts to look like total war. Any former Soviet General could tell them that Afghanistan is a daunting enough prospect for even the biggest of Armies, but when a subsequently under-resourced and over-deployed force went into both Afghanistan and Iraq they couldn't seriously expect a quick result in Syria too! Even the first 2 Conflicts look comparatively straight forward until we saw the western backed Baghdad government support Syrian government Airstrikes on the Islamists. This not only reiterates the Transience of Allegiances it also shows how quickly any acheivements (such as they are) in Iraq could unravel if or when the Syrian Conflict escalates into something rather more international.
The West's gradual freezing in their relations with Russia suggests this could become very dangerous indeed because how long would it be before Russian Strikes against the Islamists turn into similar against the FSA - and even Aircraft flown by western Airforces?
President Obama inherited a poisonous enough Chalice in 2008 when he took over from the Neocons without being embroiled in all this. He should have used his Mandate to distance America from that morass and appear as a genuinely new Political voice as a result. He might find support from those same Pentagon officials who draughted the self-critical analysis of the Iraq War instead of being in danger of appearing like another Politician with ill-conceived foreign ambitions.
Reports that are over-simplified and inaccurate about Syria also show that the same symptoms that plagued the Media in the pre-amble to the previous Wars are similarly undissipated. That although the pre-1989 Cold-War, and events of that year, might be a long time ago those who remember it are not as obsolete as some of these newer Media People think!
The NATO Secretary General warned that Russian support of the Syrian Government will lead to an escalation of the Islamists as Saudi Arabia will send further and - quote - "Powerful" Weapons to groups like Islamic State and ISIS. Is this just scaremongering, and presumably these "powerful" weapons won't include any biochemical WMDs. It has been proved that even the FSA has used them, so can we hope that NATO will use its influence (if they have any) on the Saudi's that they won't do this? Someone somewhere has to stop throwing yet more Weapons into the Conflict - the dilemma is who makes that first very crucial move?
ReplyDeleteAre NATO concerned that the Russians might do a better job on the Islamists than they have as they have no Saudis to be polite to, while - although people have their trepidations about Putin - at least Russia creates an environment that allows potential for the future rather than the Chaos that might have ensued in the Ossettias and the Caucasus before that. Also, wherever that Chaos prevails we see Corridors for mainly Chechen brokered Heroin - which has also happened in what remains of Bosnia. What this implies isn't a pro-Russian anti-westernism, but a Pragmatism, and although late 90s Media showed little Chechnya being clobbered by a big Russian Bear those same Chechen Fighters are now being targetted by NATO as much as they might have been by the Russians in the late 1990s.
What reiterates all this is the complete 180 degree Diametric William Hague (now former British Defence Secretary) made when he went from wanting to arm the 'Rebels' to bombing them - in no more than about a year.
ReplyDeleteFurther examples of this - or the potential for - are even more disturbing.....
People might say that President Obama's recent Treaty with Iran will ensure against any potential Conflict - but then Tony Blair had one with Moammar Qadaffi - events in Libya show just how temporary those might be.
People have differing opinions about the late Libyan Dictator. Some might say that he was a Despot who finally got what he deserved, others that he might have been - but had reformed - running a Country whose recent History since his demise shows what happens when it doesn't have effective leadership.
Also, others who didn't get what they deserved were the Locherbie Victims - who, because of that demise - never found out definitively who was behind the Bombing. Others - Victims of alleged Libyan sponsored Terrorism didn't either. The 1000s of People who never got to see him tried for any alleged human rights Violations. Then there are the Libyan people, now not getting what they deserve - who now have to endure a Country that is beset by Chaos. Murder and disappearances - far worse than what they knew when he was in charge.
Ditto for Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, all Evidence disposed of with the Body!
At present, President Obama is the Buffer against a War with Iran, who back the Government in Damascus, and thus part of the Russo-Syrian Alliance. People might go on about the Kurds - meaning the same Peshmurga who were backed by Assad, and who are now fighting against the Islamists and providing safe Haven for People fleeing the Conflict. Also, how long did it take before the 'democratic' Government in Iraq earned the adjective "Authoritarian" - but whose Shia predominance also means they back the Syrian Government? Thus, now aligned with an Iran People told George Bush they would once the majority Shia Population could vote.
What happens if Ms Clinton as Secretary of State for Defence had had her mooted Bombing in Iran a few years ago? This was done in a worryingly similar fashion to George Bush and Tony Blairs "Weapons of mass Destruction" Campaign as they touted for the Iraq War. Even with conventional Weapons - every expert - from Munitions specialists to Nuclear Physicists warned that the Detonation required to pierce the Concrete Iran's alleged Facilities are buried under will cause a Fall out as big - if not worse - than Chernobyl. Considering what happened when Radioacative Steam condensed and caused devastation as far from Ukraine as Scotland and even Wales, the potential for this is disastrous. It won't be easily dissipated Steam this time - but radioactive Dust - which can be far more permanent. Falling on anywhere from Dubai to India, Turkey to Nepal, did she think any of this through at all? The irony here is the People forcibly guaranteeing against any Iranian Nuclear Weapons Development are the same Russians we seem to be gradually (and not so gradually) in deepening dispute with.
As President Obama might know his way around an Atlas rather more than his Predecessor, he'll know the proximity of the Horn of Africa to Iran. How long do the African Union think the Peace in Somalia will last if People start contracting Radiation Sickness in Mogadishu and the Infrastructure couldn't cope? How about Eritrea, Kenya, the Sudan?
Can War with Iran be ruled out?
ReplyDeleteHaving seen an Interview with who became the defacto Governor of the 51st State during GWB's Presidency - Tony Blair - when asked he made the Idea seem so 'matter of fact' - so everyday - it was chilling. That at no point in the Interview did he say how all other things will be exhaustively explored before even considering it. After Senator Clintons comments President Obama negotiated with the Tehran Government, but what happens after his second term ends? That Tony Blair didn't flinch, glance around the Studio, look at his Shoes - and just came out with it - suggested that somewhere at that Level the prospect isn't entirely unlikely.
What does Ms Clinton for example think will happen to the Progressives in Iran - who have fought bravely against the Orthodoxy of the Theocracy for the rights they have achieved - if or once the first Drone is shot down over Iran with "USAF" painted on it? Slow, not invisible to Radar. some almost the same size as a small Plane - easy target for Anti-Aircraft fire. They will either be as radicalized as the Voters were in 2005 or crushed by the Government. TV might make War look like a Video Game - and we saw the beginning of this with the rolling News coverage of Desert Storm in 1991 - but it isn't. They might try and make Israels bombing of Syrian Reactors (Operation Orchard) seem safe, comfortable etc - like those "Limited Nuclear War" Scenarios they used to do in Germany, but it isn't, while Iran isn't a country that has been defeated in 1948, 67 and 73.
I think the first Casualties in a War with Iran could be those who have had the courage to oppose their own Government. As the botched Iraq Campaign has shown, unless any Coalition could guarantee the restoration of Order in the Country very quickly the radicalized Elements of Iranian Society will do what their Iraqi equivalents have done. It's the same in Syria, while it wasn't any western backed Rebels who offered protection to minorities and those who faced the Caliphate.
The misconception about Syria applies here too. That "Everyone is against the Government". As previously mentioned, an example of when everyone was against theirs was Romania and that of Ceaucescu. He lasted about a week once it started - with a few Demonstrations in Timosoara a month before.
In that instance the Army came out for the People - the only ones left were the Securitae. But then how long can an Army last without the support of the Civilian population anyway? A series of indefinite Strikes, continuous Demonstrations and Protest would gradually leave it bereft of essential Supplies. Also, an example of when the People brought down a Government despite of the Army in 1979 was..........Iran.
So if "Everyone" was "Against the Government" why wasn't Assad swept away within a few weeks? If everyone in the Army was then why haven't those who have fought for it joined the FSA since all this began?
Would "Everyone" in Iran be against the Government? No they wouldn't and the Election results of 2005 show they wouldn't. So if anyone intriguing for an internal Conflict in Iran is somehow hoping that those Progressives and Reformers might be able to launch some successful Insurgency is either a complete Fantasist or misjudging the Situation as much as George Bush Senior did in 1991 when he urged the People of the Basra region to do same with Saddam, even after the Iraqi leader had been defeated by the Desert Storm Coalition.
All Nuclear Weapons - owned by ANYONE are contentious.....
ReplyDeleteAs far back as the Kennedy Administration Nuclear Weapons were supposed to be halted - or at least their Testing was. This implies that even before those famous S.A.L.T Summits the proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was meant to have stopped. Kennedy opposed the testing of Nuclear Weapons - which common sense and decency tells us this also includes the Launching of Vehicle Missiles. After all, if you don't intend to use or test Detonations - you also don't intend to build the Missiles that would carry them.
Once that last S.A.L.T Agreement was made any Nuclear Weapons - regardless of whose they might be - are probably illegal according to international Law.
Deterrence doesn't work anyway, as Argentinian Leader General Galtieri knew he could invade the Falklands in 1982 because Britain's Polaris were aimed at the Soviet Union, and would require American permission before they could redeploy to the South Atlantic. Not that it would ever be given because, in reality, the UK only owns the Franchise to these and Tridents l and ll, America sells the Lease.
Also, even Stalin shied away from deploying forces too close to the Border with German occupied Europe. NATO hasn't been quite as reticent with it's deployment in not just former Warsaw Pact Countries but also those of the former USSR. This contravenes Agreements Bush senior had with Gorbachev, and is also probably illegal in this Context. Moscow might have been placated rather more if the Region had been regarded as a DMZ (Demilitarized Zone)and the original Treaty kept to. Thus, since the 1930s the Region was always potentially fractious and People must have realized how provocative it was when some of its Counties joined NATO in recent years. Vaclav Havel might have been right when he said to Bush Senior that now the Warsaw Pact has been dismantled, shouldn't the same be done with a NATO that was the Wests Cold war Response to it?
The reversal of the Bush-Gorbachev Agreement is another of those Diametrics - and one which emphasises a deterioration in the Standard of todays Politicians. Gorbachev the Reformer, negotiates with Bush Senior, while if Assad Junior - another Reformer - is deposed who does anyone negotiate with? That while he isn't his Father, Bush Junior isn't his either - and for exactly the opposite reason. It also shows how Agreements don't necessarily continue after those who established them.
What might happen in the Event of a conventional War?
ReplyDeleteDuring the Iran-Iraq war you had a Country using the latest Weapons supplied by the West (Iraq) fighting one who mobilised a Civilian Militia, fought with Weapons that were either out of date or in need of Spares, (covered by the Embargo) and were doing what the VC and NVA did during their Conflict in Vietnam and making their own (Iran). They still, gradually, fought Saddam to a standstill and eventual Withdrawal. This not only shows the resolve of the Iranians in the face of an Aggressor it also does their ingenuity and resourcefulness. And there are something like 3.5 as many of them as there are Iraqis, in a Country similarly bigger, while the years since that Conflict have seen them re-arm.
Also, if Iraq now looks to Iran as another Shia Country this implies a complete Collapse of the Government in Baghdad, concurrent Protest and diminished Support.
What if - and this is a very very big IF - they do have Nuclear Weapons and decide to use them if or when it looks like they might be invaded or attacked? What are the wider implications for this?
Meanwhile, back in Syria, President Assad might have given the Kurds a semi-autonomous homeland for geo-political reasons and to court favour with them, but that was rather more than Sykes-Piquot did. Also, while he did this, and before people get too enthused about the 'Rebels', in the event of any government collapse, who will guarentee the same protection to non-islamics in Syria or freedom of movement to Kurdish Peoplehe has if this happens if even the FSA have had skirmishes with the Peshmurga?
On the Subject of the Heroin Trade, if Chechens are using it to finance their Operations in Syria, where does the Money go once it finds its way to Afghanistan? If it forms part of the same Equation then it probably buys the Bullets and Bombs that have killed Coalition Troops and maligned Afghani Security Forces in the years after the Taliban.
Events in Syria have indirectly shown something else too.
ReplyDeleteThat the Russians unambiguous approach to the Islamists is because they don't have to Kow Tow to the Saudis. They have everything they need, mineral and natural Resources of any description, a huge, highly skilled Workforce and a very advanced Culture. Were it not for the globalised Economy they could close their Borders with everywhere and don't need to invade anywhere. Paradoxically, the NATO presence in the Baltic Countries and former Warsaw Pact is exactly why Stalin refused to withdraw from same after 1945. That it has become they who are now acting like the Pact that everyone in the West deplored before 1989-91. The further expansion of the European Union was another of these - being the Politico-economic equivalent.
Also, as the Ukraine has proved, Putin is no Gorbachev. That while the former has waged Military War in its eastern Zone, the latter wouldn't send the Army should Warsaw Pact Countries dispense with their Communist Governments. What Strategists failed to realise was how the Ukrainian Stance invoked the Russian response because of that NATO Presence on its Borders. The Georgian President, trying to flex his Muscles to impress NATO with a view to joining invaded South Ossetia. This not only cost him any semi-autonomous Control of it and co-operation with Moscow in the Region, it also cost the Black Sea Seaports of Abkhazia. Thus, because of this they (the Russians) now have those and the Crimea after their Referendum. The moral is don't provoke them at any cost. Sakashvili is no Eduard Shevardnadze, who - as Gorbachevs Foriegn Minister - understood the Kremlin rather more than his Successor and was never as provocative when he became President of Georgia after the end of the Soviet Union.
How the Ukraine was shown was another of those misleading things - suggesting Prague 1989 or something, but it wasn't and there were as many against as there might have been for the Government in Kiev.
Also, the inconsistancy in the pro-Euro camp became apparent when they told us how Peace is guaranteed with further economic activity, but that gradually ended east of the Vistula - quite ominously. It almost ended completely when Sanctions were applied by the West a few years ago. When there was a Transaction of Activity it finally ended the cliched Stereotyping of the Cold War on either side, while it was American Money that financed the likes of Kordakovski when he bought Gazprom for $200,000,000. What this also shows is the potential for Reforms in a Syria that was trying to join the Worlds Economy before the current Conflict.
The other problem People face is something we did within a few years in Northern Ireland should they (the Government) collapse completely, and something we have seen in both Iraq and Afghanistan. When British Soldiers arrived in Ulster they were greeted with Trays of Tea and Biscuits by the Catholics who saw them as Guarantors against the Loyalists. That changed drastically after Bloody Sunday, while the Loyalists preferred the Black and Tans from their own Community rather than the British Army. If this happened in Cities and Towns in Britain what would it be like in Syria? This is why - even if the FSA triumph - the Job won't be completed for very many years after that. Except I wouldn't like to be the President or Prime Minister who has to send them.
I suppose the Saying "if it aint broke don't fix it" applies here, because just after the Cold War and a few years after there was a Formula that worked. As those who were part of that moved on they were replaced by People who didn't, couldn't ......... or wouldn't ........ realise that.
The awful truth about Syria is how it has gone on for so long there are People who now know nothing else. That if you were born when the first Bullets were fired you are now 6 years old. What this means is all you know depends on who controlled which Area of the Country you lived in. If that happens to be run by ISIS then anything from elsewhere starts to look like hostility. It becomes difficult to convince them about what might be, or even what might have been before it all. After a few years of Chaos in Iraq there were People who harked back to the Regime - where there was a functioning Infrastructure, but some in Syria don't even have that now.
ReplyDeleteThis is what I meant when I said that some might see ISIS as a legitimate force in their Region and others as Hostiles - regardless of who they might be - they start to support their Leaders even if their 'Government' is the Caliphate. That they become hostile to those who oppose it and wage War on that Region. This is the most difficult thing any Peacekeepers face. How do you convince a growing number of People about something they've never had?
I'll continue with a Russian Analogy............
John Kerry calling for War Crimes Investigations against Moscow and Damascus is like Roosevelt condemning Rokossovski for clobbering Von Paulus at Stalingrad (Operation Koltso) without first condemning Hitler for Barbarossa. When the Nazis invaded the Ukraine they were greeted as Liberators against Moscow - rather like anyone who opposed the Government in Damascus - even though the Nazis were so detestable, while ISIS are even more extreme than Al Qaida. I wrote somewhere nearly 4 years ago that any 'War' in Syria is to ignore the Expression "Better the Devil you know than all the ones you don't".
How wrong those Ukrainians must have felt after a few Months of Nazi Occupation - even more so when their Infrastructure was destroyed as the latter retreated. So much for being 'liberated' then! But had it not been for the Russian resolve to defeat the Invasion that Occupation might have lasted rather more than the 3 years before its eventual Rout. Had that not happened Ukrainians - not Germans - might have flown the Swastika over Kiev after a few more years. Meaning they might have accepted the Reich as their 'Government' and not the Kremlin.
Assad afforded at least some Guarantees for Ethnic Minorities - while Moscow did for the 3.1 Million Jews in the Ukraine before 22nd June 1941. Ditto for the Jewish Communities elsewhere in the Soviet Union.
Mr Kerry ought to be venting his Spleen at those who initiated this bloody shambles to start with - while the Chilcot Enquiry was the start of something positive towards that. When that was going on People hoped that the Politicians had finally seen sense.
Also, as Immigration was a huge Issue in recent years - has anyone compared the Figures for Syrian Immigration before - and after - this War started?
ReplyDeleteWhile Politicians completely misjudged the Situation abroad they also did that of at home. That those Foreign Policy Disasters would lead to other Problems shows that a chronic lack of Macro-management was applied here. This has put Syrian Refugees in an awful position where they can't stay at home - while they are unwanted everywhere else too. Calais is turning into a Ghetto of People fleeing Conflict - and the Stories from there are quite harrowing. Paradoxically, David Cameron was a Casualty of this in the Wake of Brexit - while falling into the Trap of his own Foreign Policy Decisions a few years before. The horrible thing about this was how it also revealed Euro-Chauvinism in how People were quite content to Immigrate around the Continent, watching the Wars on Cable, Satellite and Terrestrial TV, even seeing and voting for the various Governments responsible - until People from those Wars started arriving in their Back Yard!
Today we had the terrible News that the Russian Ambassador to Turkey Andrei Karlov was assassinated by an off-duty Policeman. An obvious attempt to scupper efforts by Moscow and Ankara to establish a working Relationship to solve the Impasse in Syria. It is also symptomatic of the War that has gone on there which has served only to spread Islamism - including Turkey. Hence why many hoped it would never happen. (Read all of the above).
ReplyDeleteI hope that it won't prevent Russia establishing a Triumvirate Agreement with Iran and Turkey which is probably one of the only real Solutions to resolving a wider Conflict negotiating with soon-to-be President Donald Trump, while todays Tragedy does nothing to help People in Aleppo who are being evacuated in a deal brokered by Russia. It also reveals that Press Reports of those in the Enclave were all "Moderate Rebels" were inaccurate, and there was an Agenda at work that continued Islamic Extremism.
Meanwhile, here's an Historical Diagram for everyone from former Archbishop Envoys to anyone in the Yippieocracy who tries lumping us in with any Islamic Extremists......
ReplyDeleteI decided to post this in all these Threads for those who haven't read it.
https://metrowynn.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/arthur-balfour-to-king-arthur.html
As far as I'm concerned this whole 9/11, Al Qaida, War on Terrorism thing is 2 People - a couple of 70's Playboys - who in a Fit of Pique decided to got to War with each other. 1 for Prophet, the other for Profit!
ReplyDeleteI know that Politicians, Religious Leaders and Media Preachers, and the Media generally might have a Problem realizing this - while there might be some who glibly use the Wars as an excuse for all sorts of other sinister Agendi, along with the Neocons, pro-War Liberals, New Labourists and Osama Trash Can - but there are People who don't - and never wanted to know or have anything to do with it!
ReplyDeleteIn something reminiscent of the sort of Tit for Tat Reportage we used to see during the Cold War recent Events in Syria have shown how dangerous the Conflict is. Even during the Stand-off of the Missile Crisis we never actually had any Military Action like we have seen in Syria - while the potential for 'retaliation' was always just implied. Because of this, and because of the Cold Waresque Reporting some have indulged in it shouldn't just be Russia and Iran calling for an objective Investigation into what happened at Khan Sheikhoun.
ReplyDeleteAmerica has to be aware how any Attack on the Syrian Regime is going to be interpreted by the Islamists and although 'Enemies Enemies not being your Friend' applies to the Region they (the Islamists) can only gain from what was done at the al Shayrat airbase. All of this shows the imperative for a Trump-Putin Summit sooner rather than later - while this hasn't exactly set a positive Precedent for that. It sends a Signal to Moscow that the US seems more prepared to attack Damascus rather than ISIS or any of the other Extremists involved in the Conflict and makes Negotiations difficult. Considering the Gravitas of the Situation People had hoped that this would have been on the Agenda for the new Presidents crucial first 100 Days!
Here's a Question that I notice the mainstream Media never asked....
ReplyDeleteWhat would Simon Wiesenthal have made of President Obama's Announcement that Osama Bin Laden had been apprehended in Pakistan and whose Body had been thrown off the Side of an Aircraft Carrier? That while his People - from an Israel infinitely smaller, with a Budget and Military a Fraction of the US - could apprehend Nazi War Criminals - bringing them back to Israel for Trial America couldn't. That they achieved this before the Internet, Mobile Phones, Satellites and Drones - and America couldn't.
And because America couldn't Americans never found out conclusively who was responsible for 9/11 - rather like, thanks to Hillary Clinton the People of Locherbie never found out who was responsible for the Bombing. Ghadaffi might or might not have done it - but he would have known who was. That while Nuremberg was a very public Trial - as were those of Wiesenthal's Captives - Saddam was tried in a small Room and disposed of as unceremoniously as Bin Laden.
That while his People wanted - and got - closure for the Holocaust - the Charade of the Client Dictator and their Paymasters meant the same never applied. That certain Politicians might be embarrassed as Saddam talks of Meetings he had with them in the 1980's, or we find out what transpired between Bush and the Taliban in the 90's.
That the Media neglected to mention this says something about what they have become in the years since the Age of Innocence at the end of the 1980's!
The sinister thing is that while PT Barnham only did what he did for Entertainment Purposes - they not only don't tell us what's really going on, they also spin out this Myth - this Lie - about all that, they are no better than a GWB, Condoleeza Rice and since shamed Colin Powell, British Politicians and anyone else continually banging on about "War on Terrorism" etc. That while they cultivate their Clients - like the CIA did whatever Al Qaida might or might not be, they - like the Politicians who lied us into these Wars - have no moral Authority. That while someone who did gave his post-Holocaust Life to hunting down those responsible for the Murder of 6 Million Jews - they are as much a part of the Al Quaida Equation - by default - as any other tall Bloke with a Beard!
ReplyDeleteAfter all, as someone said - the Truth is found in the Result - and while some of us still struggle - they don't, and was anyone dumped in the Sea from an Aircraft Carrier - or do we just have their Word for it? And, 'y'know - I don't particularly care anymore whether certain Spooks say this might be "Perverted" or stuffed Shirts Scoffers, Quaffers and local Dinner Party Club Guarantors find this "Offensive" - I'm sure Mr Wiesenthal would have a few Words to say to them in Hebrew or Yiddish that might not be particularly broadcastable, and I find him infinitely more believable than I could ever find them. If the Truth is found in the Result - absolutely none of this - from those Planes being flown into the WTC, the Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and North Africa - seems to have done them any harm at all - quite the opposite!
.....And while I find Mr Wiesenthal far more believable than the Dinner Party Club Media - whose Quaffing and Scoffing came from somewhere anyway, or anyone who works in a Building the same shape as a 50p Piece - I also do former Hostages, their Unions whose Culture of Expend ability is as disgusting as anything any socially incestuous Bovines might say - and even Hostage Namesakes who wrote Books about Roads!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.economicpopulist.org/content/news-corp-finished-senator-rockefeller-tells-feds-investigate-fox-hacking-911-victims
ReplyDeleteIf I had a current Press Card and Accreditation recent Developments would prompt me to ask some hitherto unasked Questions.....
ReplyDeleteThe first is about the apparent Apprehension and Assassination of Osama Bin Laden..
If Simon Wiesenthal could apprehend and bring Nazi War Criminals to Trial in Israel from as far away as South America - with nothing like the Technology and Resources the US has - why couldn't they have done same with the Al Qaida Leader? Sure, if those US Navy Seals had located him in Pakistan wouldn't it have been appropriate for them to bring him to the US for Trail? The American People particularly, and the World generally ought to have had the Chance to see him brought to Justice and to answer for his Crimes considering the Extent of the War(s) that have been fought to rout Terrorism since 9/11.
Even if they couldn't have brought him back alive they ought to have brought back his embalmed Corpse so People could obtain Closure on the Trauma caused by the Attack on the WTC, particularly in New York. An NYC Journalist ought to have asked President Obama this when he made the relevant Announcement.
When it was announced that Moamar Qaddafi had been killed not only would this prompt Journalist Questions about why he couldn't have been brought to Justice it also prompts a Diplomatic Inquiry. Locherbie was the worst Terrorist Incident we have ever seen in Britain - with an end as inconclusive as anything surrounding Al Qaida and we ought to have been able to put him on Trial to establish once and for all who was responsible. We weren't, and as Ambassador to Washington I would insist on a Meeting with at least the Secretary of State to ask this - taking Copies of all relevant Treaty's (Extradition etc) we have with the US with me. As the Wife of a former President Hillary Clinton should know this - and what the Implications for our Relationship with America mean. As a seasoned Politician she should be aware of the Trauma Britain suffered by an Incident that was almost as devastating as 9/11. By bumping him off like they did it shows scant Regard for that.
President Trumps Comments on the Manchester Arena Bombing needed Scrutiny that wasn't forthcoming. When he made his Announcement in the wake of the Tragedy he said "There will be more!". As a British Journalist I would have raised my Hand and asked him to elaborate as to what he means "There will be more!". As an Ambassador I would be phoning the Whitehouse wanting a meeting with him to ask what he means by saying this on global TV. After all, it's OUR People being killed, not HIS. He said this himself when he proclaimed how he "represented the People of Pittsburgh, not Paris" - which also means he doesn't represent us. It's in this Context I would insist on a Meeting to clarify his Comment - "There will be more".
Also, maybe People should compare the response to Locherbie to that of 9/11. it was no less deliberate when they detonated the Bomb in a Plane over Land rather than Sea as it was to fly 2 of them into a Building and the Pentagon. No less ruthless and calculated to cause maximum Trauma. Except, there was no Coalition set up to bomb and invade Libya. No deployment of 100's of 1000's of Troops in Tunisia or Alexandria, no huge Fleet in the Mediterranean launching Airstrikes and Missiles (Gibraltar is only on the other side of that Sea, Malta even closer)- and no Histrionics by Presidents and Prime Ministers. No Public Chest beating and no "War on Terrorism". Margaret Thatcher was no Dove - she'd sent the Task Force into the South Atlantic in 1982 - neither was Ronald Reagan - who fought several Conflicts as President, but their Response to Locherbie and its Contrast to 9/11 is quite telling. An Attack that killed 100's of People, wounded many more and wiped out half a Scottish Village.
Something needs saying here......
ReplyDeleteIsn't it a Tribute to the Resolve of all involved that Lebanon hasn't plunged into the Morass that has afflicted Syria in recent years? Be they Christian, Moslem (of any Sect or Grouping), Palestinian, Druze, ALL have ensured Lebanon - whose Peace has always been precarious - didn't resume their War of 1975. Even Names and Groups synonymous with previous Terrorist Activity have defended their Country against the Islamism that engulfed Iraq and Syria. This in no way justifies their Activities in the past but considering Lebanon's turbulent History this puts the Syrian Tragedy in context. There have been incidents but they are sporadic and haven't produced any Tit for Tat Recriminations. That Lebanon can resist what Syria hasn't has created the bitterest of Paradoxes.
When Hostages were released they invariably were via Damascus. Could we now have a Situation where those in Syria might via Beirut?
Israel must have noticed how Attacks from South Lebanon have dropped to nothing in recent Years and while it's very unlikely Jerusalem would ever be in the same Country - let alone Room - as Hezbollah they must now see how Events in Lebanon have given those of Syria Perspective.
I hope the Lebanese continue to get as much support from the international Community as possible so they can maintain their Position in the Debacle!
Having just seen loads of Documentaries about Vietnam what is astonishing is how the Names Cambodia and Laos can be interchanged with Syria and Iraq. That while the NVA and Viet Cong used the Ho Chi Minh Trail to maneuver Troops and Supplies into the South the Islamists have done same in the Countries of the Levant. In 1990 Assad closed the Border with Iraq to ensure the Gulf War didn't spread to his Country, which is more than can be said of Nixon's Policy towards Cambodia. If War ravaged Lebanon can do this in the current Conflict why couldn't he in Indochina?
Sihanouks Hand was forced when he had to court Favour with Mau rather than America as the Vietnam War encroached into his Country. How this was going to help Americas implicit and explicit War against Communism is a Question for late 60's-early 70's Washington, while it meant Pnom Penh played, by proxy, into the Hands of the Communist Khymer Rouge. Even if it meant they didn't, the Domino Theory subscribed to by 60's Politicians ought to have prompted them to be rather more proactive in their Support of Sihanouks Government. Commentators have said that Nixon ought to have been impeached for his Policy of bombing Cambodia - it could also be argued that he ought to have been for incompetence and inconsistancy.
Assad's alleged 'Plan' to do another Chemical Attack......
ReplyDeleteHere's what Syrian Activists have to say about it...........
"For their part, Syrian activists are asking why the US is merely issuing a warning instead of acting if they really believe a chemical attack is imminent, she said."
I find it a bit inconsistent that they've decided to announce it before anything has been done rather than do some sort of Strike against it. If Assad meant to do this he's going to anyway, while the 'Announcement' would prompt him to relocate the Hardware, thus thwarting any Attempt by the Americans to neutralize it. Either it's a strategic Gaff on the part of the Pentagon or they've just made it up. After the Controversy surrounding the previous alleged 'Attack' would Damascus be stupid enough to do it?
Meanwhile, here's a Documentary I recommend People watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NWwuEIsiZk
When Syria affected their Pax Syriana in Lebanon in 1976 they did so with the approval of the Americans! It brought an end to a Year of bloody internecine War that killed 1000's, destroyed the Country and caused the disappearance of an estimated 17,000 Lebanese. It's a shame that Washington seems to have completely changed their Perspective on the Government in Damascus and how they don't seem to have applied the Lebanese Template to the Levant since Dick Cheyney's stated intent to depose the Assad Regime. Better the Devil you know that all the ones you don't, while a Lebanese Politician - probably sensing Deja Vu - said they were at risk of descending into the unknown!
Here's something I find completely staggering......
ReplyDeleteGeneral David Petraus successfully establishes post-War Mosul, but the De-Ba'athification Process dismantles the Regions Security Forces who have successfully quelled Insurgents and Violence, THEN the Government inconsistently reappoints Gadaui - a particularly brutal former Republican Guard Commander as Police Chief. He then starts alienating the Population with his Brutality. Meanwhile, the Military - not all of whom were Ba'athists - has been disbanded and has to start again with inexperienced Soldiers. By the time ISIS invades Mosul there is no viable defense force. Even Germany employed the Services of non-Nazi Von Mannstein to train post WW2 Soldiers. What is astonishing is how Elements who fought Insurgents in the period just after the Collapse of the Regime - and with the full Knowledge of Petraus - had proved that they wanted a successful Iraq, but were still dismantled.
Here's something that has probably summed up the Syrian Conflict - particularly the last Paragraph. What I hope is that the redrawing of any Syrian Map will now include a Homeland for the Kurds - something that Sykes-Picot neglected when every Opportunity to do so wasn't enacted. Assad even gave them semi-autonomous Status a few years ago. Maybe he will have to concede full independence for the largest Stateless People in the World in any post-war Agreement. The international Community should acknowledge their Contribution (seen by many as the most effective) against ISIS and ISIL.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-bashar-al-assad-putin-russia-syrian-forces-aleppo-win-victory-west-should-be-ashamed-a7450336.html
And it isn't just their Courage and Fortitude in fighting the Islamists it's also their willingness to offer humanitarian Aid to 100s of 1000s displaced by the War. They aren't even Lebanon - who at least have their Independence. As that War protracted - against the Iraqi Backdrop - I've always felt that a Homeland for the Kurd's could be the only decent thing to come from all of this. Iraq has turned into a toxic Spleen-venting of Shi'ite and Sunni Factionalism - while, if the Politicians who sold this sorry Mess to us in 2003 used "WMDs" as a Pretext for their War of that time - wasn't it the Kurds of Halabja who bore the Brunt of those? Certain former Presidents and Prime-Ministers would have to acknowledge that in the Context of the Chilcot Inquiry.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, a search through some relevant Media and things really do start getting a bit bizarre.....
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZBRcdy7ndI - It is the same George Bush who became President right???? If you watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuXcxLcXKuE that is the same Vice President Cheyney whose Government were telling us only a few years before that Iraq and Al Qaida were linked? A Government of chronic Inconsistency - I mean, if you're going to scam People at least get your Story straight before you do!
As 9/11 was the thing that started all this and having seen quite a few Documentaries and Podcasts about it I have a few Questions.....
ReplyDeleteIf Interceptors were scrambled (as official Reports says they were) why didn't they intercept the second Plane at least? There were another 17 Minutes before the second Plane crashed into the South Tower. People might forgive NORAD for failing to do so with the first at 8.46 AM - but not at 9.03 AM.
The Attack on the Pentagon involved a flight maneuver even one of our legendary Red Arrows Pilots would have found difficult in a Boeing 757 which meant they crashed into a Flank of the Building which happened to be on the opposite side of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfelts Office?
If many of the alleged 'Hijackers' were alive in the days after 9/11 - one of whom finally exacted an Apology from American Security People, others still working in Saudi Arabia and other Arab Countries also didn't - who did hijack those Planes - flying them to certain Death that day?
These are the obvious Questions - but there are many - like Passports that survive what Titanium Black Boxes and Steel couldn't, the attempt to write off Pentagon Deficits (Moneys that have disappeared) amounting to more than 3 Trillion $'s being investigated in the part of the Building that was hit, Documents in WTC7 that were destroyed when it collapsed implicating IT and Finance Companies, and the presence of Thermite in Residues on what Iron and Steel that wasn't irresponsibly sold to the Chinese within 2 Weeks of 9/11 - suggesting the WTC was demolished rather than collapsed.
Something else is mentioned that seems to have been ignored - and that is what a former WTC Janitor says - that People were suffering Burns BEFORE the Planes struck. This supports the Idea that Thermite was used to demolish the Building.
As many Questions as there have been since Dallas 1963 and the JFK Assassination, but Questions that should be asked as all of the above is the Damage and Trauma caused by what happened in 2001.
To give you an Idea of how much the Pentagons alleged Financial Discrepancy amounted to at the end of the 1990's Britain's national (Government) Debt amounted to £1.56 Trillion in the first Quarter of 2015. Documentary Estimates (with some Database Spreadsheets to show this) put the Pentagons at something like $3.4 Trillion, and that's nearly 18 years ago. Attempts have been made to audit the Pentagons Accounts - but those doing it found the Figures so stupefying they eventually gave up.
ReplyDeleteUpon becoming D.O.D Secretary Donald Rumsfelt said he was going to do it - but maybe even he found the Task so vast that it was never completed. Donald Trump announced that something like a few $100 Billion were 'missing' (unaccounted for) during his Election Campaign - so either he has severely underestimated the Figure or the Money involved has somehow diminished in the years since the very start of the 21st Century.
What seems odd about the 2 consecutive 'Hicrashes' is how NORAD failed to intercept either - even after the first confirmed that any unusual Airline Activity was definitely suspect and the Pentagon is the most heavily defended Building in the World - bristling with Anti-Aircraft Missiles. Not only were Accounts of the Deficit destroyed, the 'crash' ensured Donald Rumsfelt would emerge unscathed. That a 'Pilot' who could hardly fly a single Engine'd Cesna suddenly became as adroit as a Red Arrows Flyer is also astonishing.
I'm not a Conspiracy Theorist who subscribes to any of that 'Greater Israel' Nonsense (as soon as I hear "Zionists of Israel" in any Commentary I switch off), but I can see a huge financial Motive involved here, coupled with the destruction of valuable Documents at WTC7, and all of this has had an Effect far more conclusive than any Document Shredder. The Planes (and subsequent Fireball) crashed into and incinerated the Offices of some of the Companies implicated in the Twin Towers.
Also, how embarrassing must is have been for both an emphatic Security Community and the Media when one of the NYC18 walked into a Consulate a few days after announcing that he was very much alive? Then it became apparent many of the others were too!
All of this is enough to put you off of flying and spend the rest of your Life living in a Bungalow!
Also, the disastrous Governor General of post-Saddam Iraq was involved in various economic Subterfuges before he was sent to Baghdad. David Petreus saw all his Progress in the Mosul Province completely undone when Paul Bremner assumed provisional Control of the Country.
ReplyDeleteIt all gets even more bizarre when you see more recent Interviews with - then - Vice President Cheney who denies Saddam's alleged Link with Al Qaida (like, that is the same VP who was telling us otherwise a few years earlier right?) or when George Bush and Al Gore were in a TV Debate in 1999 and the former told us how he felt America shouldn't interfere in other Countries. That it was those Countries who should "Help themselves"?
Maybe he changed his Mind when Rumsfelt showed him those Pentagon Balance Sheets, while maybe President Trump should show us how that Deficit had miraculously reduced by 2016. Wish someone somewhere would write off my Debts as effectively! Every Chancellor of Britain's Exchequer has found themselves in more Debt after their Tenure than before, and while very many People might have supported the Iraq War in 2003, how many of them can now see the Connection between that and the Bedroom Tax?
So, no - this isn't some "Zionists of Israel" Conspiracy to somehow create a 'Greater Israel' in the Levant that would swallow most of Syria, Iraq, Jordan and what remains of Palestine - and I'm sure most Jews are quite happy with their Lives in where ever they might live. That sort of Hamster in Wheel Journalism is just a Distraction - with Argument and Counter-Argument that looks very stage managed.
In fact, I can imagine many Jews saying in Hebrew, Yiddish, and whatever their Host Countries speak - what they thought of something that not only gives them a bad Name but also smacks of being relocated to what amounts to a huge Ghetto! This sort of Playground Activism gets put into the Street by all sorts of People whose Motives remain a Question for them!
It's also an Insult to serious Journalism as People strive to find the Truth rather like James Garrison did in the Wake of the JFK Shooting in November 1963.
Also, apparently, according to other Flight Instructors Mohammed Atta - the supposed Leader of this Gang of marauding Muslims wasn't exactly Biggles either - who couldn't even take off in a Cesna. So, somewhere in the World, up until September the 10th 2001 is a Bunch of People who out-flew the USAF, US Army Airforce, the US Marines Airforce and the National Guard Airforce, out-Intelled the Pentagon, the NSA, the FBI and the Cops, and out-politiked Capitol Hill, the Whitehouse, and every Regional Equivalent.
Cripes, Wouldn't want to meet them on a dark night!!!!!
That's the Implication isn't it, even if you completely accept the official Report about 9/11, that there were these People who totally outwitted ALL of those Airforces, ALL of that Technology, ALL of those Agencies, and considering the Political Ramifications ALL of those Politicians. Not once - but 4 times - with large Aircraft - none of which could fly above the Speed of Sound.
ReplyDeleteIt's as embarrassing for those Organizations as Mathias Rust was for the Russians in 1987 when he flew a rented Cessna from Finland after 50 Hours flight Experience and landed in Red Square. The big Difference is that the Kremlin dismissed all of those responsible for allowing a Teenager to enter supposedly impenetrable Air-space. Was anyone even suspended after 9/11? No they weren't - and it seems that the opposite applied, with People being promoted or rising to Prominence because of it.
Mathias Rust at least invoked a Chortle in a Cold War Environment that gleefully exploited anything that made the other side look silly or incompetent, but there was nothing silly about what happened in 2001. Those responsible should all have at least faced Suspension for the complete Failure to protect US Citizens and others from what happened - while Britain's former Defense Secretary Liam Fox had to resign after the Financial Improprieties Scandal of a few years ago. Did his equivalent in the US do the same when something far worse than some insider Dealing happen? No it didn't - while the Compromising of all Layers of Defense not only showed how flawed it was - it also made the US look farcical and inept. A very dangerous Precedent when America is supposed to be the last remaining Super-Power and their Claim to represent Freedom and Democracy from that Position.
Then it got worse as they lashed out at all and everyone, while effectively blackmailing the World "You are either with us - or the Terrorists" GWB famously said, thus polarizing the Planet and removing any chance of Neutrality.
And all of this is in the Context of the official Story - irrespective of any Subterfuge - real or imagined, any Theories, and completely devoid of any Scrutiny.
..... And when I say Neutrality I mean a Nations sovereign right to decide how it is going to deal with the Fall-out of 9/11. Militarily, our Soldiers might have been better deployed in Strathclyde than Basra when its Airport was bombed a few years ago, diplomatically - everyone has been completely outmaneuvered by a Moscow not stymied by Bush's Stance on Iran. Something that would eventually cost President Obama Billions when he finally negotiated with Tehran in a rapidly deteriorating Relationship with Russia. A Tehran whose Shi'ite Islam puts it at odds with both Al Qaida (who and whatever that might be) and the Islamism of ISIL and ISIS. Even Tony Blairs Summit with Qaddafi proved Whitehall's acknowledgement that Tripoli WASN'T a Sponsor of Al Qaida. After all, why would he be negotiating with them if he thought they were.
ReplyDeleteThis is the worst part of all of this as it was the one Example of an independent Move by a Western Country in its Dealings with the lesser of some Evils. The Libyan Colonel was one of those Devils we knew - at least - except that was all undone in more recent years. Tony Blairs supposed ethical Foreign Policy that didn't just whither it was pulverized by the War on Terrorism Juggernaut that consumed and laid waste all before it - thus the People of Darfur were slaughtered and starved in their 1000's.
What if Washington hadn't issued its Proclamation of Absolutism in 2001? What if its Security was secure in September that year, what if 9/11 hadn't happened at all? An eventual Summit with Assad?????
And it was through all that that the current Morass exists....
ReplyDeleteMoscow gained a Foothold in an Iran made off-limits by a West bullied, bribed or blackmailed by G.W.B. Because of that, and Tehran's Support of the Syrian Government, Moscow also supports Damascus. People have asked if Russia would ever abandon Assad - but to do so they would have to forfeit Iranian Support in keeping Islamic former Soviet States in check. An influential Force - and an Islamic Authority - in a former Soviet Empire that includes Kazakhstan - and one that has waged recent Wars in the Caucasus. Putin's Army proved its Strength when it obliterated Georgia a few years ago - but even Vladimir realizes the Potential of Diplomacy. It also ensures Surety with their proxy-dealings with Hezbollah. Russians can - and have - become Hostages in the past, while the Group is their Ally in the Lebanon.
Moscow would have to be offered something very substantial indeed before they forfeit any of this - but would NATO even consider withdrawing from, and cancelling Membership of, the Baltic Countries for example? Would the West be prepared to allow full recognition of the Crimea as part of the CIS? How about the very fractious eastern Ukraine? How would Kiev respond if the West ceded it to the Russians?
And while it was 9/11 that started all of this - what started 9/11 happened in the late 1970's when the Government in Kabul tried to apply a western Ideology to a tribal Society. When I say tribal I mean secularly tribal - not theologically. Najibullah invited (or should that be implored) the Soviet Army to support his faltering Regime - and we all know the rest.
To realize the Danger of any potential Conflict with Hezbollah you have to read what Professor Daniel Byman - who advises on Counter-Terrorism to the US Government - says of their Position in the current Debacle and his Conclusion in this......... https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/hezbollahs-growing-threat-against-u-s-national-security-interests-in-the-middle-east/
ReplyDelete"The million plus Syrian refugees in Lebanon are a potential destabilizing force that could lead to more violence in the fragile country. The refugees might take part in the fighting in Syria, with Lebanon serving as a base and a haven. It is also possible that the refugees might incite violence in Lebanon, fostering a civil war, as the Palestinians did before them. To prevent this, more U.S. and international aid for refugees in Lebanon is vital. The United States should also assist Lebanon in securing its borders and otherwise trying to prevent the Syrian conflict from spilling over into the country.
Finally, the United States should work with Israel to ensure its deterrence of Hizballah and that its limited uses of force in Syria and elsewhere do not escalate into a broader confrontation. Should the U.S. step up its role in Syria and Iraq, and thus interact indirectly with Hizballah-linked forces, tight coordination with Israel becomes especially important."
This implies that any US involvement in Syria and Iraq that might mean conflict with Hezbollah Proxies could bring Israel into the War. Hezbollah, as he says, have been arming and organizing for any Eventuality with Israel while their recent Conflict with Jerusalem was fought to a Draw. This could become very dangerous indeed in the Region and escalate the War which might gradually involve Iran. That any Conflict we have seen before which remained within Lebanon won't be so contained and spread much further than its Borders.
In other Words World War .......
ReplyDeleteAt the Moment the common Enemy in the Levant is ISIS - but what happens after they collapse - and they've been given approximately 2 years before it's estimated their Caliphate is gone. Who do they (the US) go to War with then? Once ISIS have been routed will they then fight those Proxies, while ISIS then mobilize a Bombing Campaign that could concentrate on Lebanon? Thankfully Lebanon has remained largely peaceful but in Cities like Tripoli there are Enclaves of Alawite Moslems who support Assad surrounded by 100's of 1000s of hostile Sunnis who don't. It doesn't take an advanced Strategist to see what ISIS would try next as they relocate their War to Lebanon. It also doesn't tax the Imagination to see how this could escalate into a Conflict with Hezbollah if the West - and US particularly - fight their proxies in Syria and Iraq once ISIS have gone.
So, instead of tacit Airstrikes in support of Kurds fighting an Enemy that is uniquely isolated because of its Brutality, and Obnoxiousness do People stop the War at that point and start negotiating or do those Guns and Planes continue against Damascus and their Allies?
Bashar Al Assad wasn't a Social Democrat in a Democracy with Centuries old Institutions - but he also wasn't his Father, and the Irony is that while the US supported or at least approved Hafez's 'Pax-Syriana' in Lebanon in 1976 they don't support his Son. Seeing what happened in Libya - even if Tony Blair had added Damascus to his 'Diplomacy Things to do' List that US Juggernaut might have crushed that too!
Before People wrap themselves up in Smugness and say "So what, it's just a Region that has known nothing but Conflict since the Crusades - or in modern times, since T.E Lawrence and Faisal waged their Guerrilla Campaign against the Turks in WWl" many Arabs call the War in Chechnya a "Jihad". Some have said how a few of those 9/11 Hijackers fought as Mercenaries in Bosnia - suggesting even more "Jihad".
ReplyDeleteSomeone once said it was Gorbachev who first warned against the Threat of Islamism. It wasn't, that Piece of Advice was found in the Writings of Tolstoy's "War and Peace" when one of his Characters said "You must be careful of those troublesome Asiatics!" Gorbachev discovered just how troublesome they could be in Afghanistan. A War that started as secular tribal Resistance to it's own Government and Occupation by the Kremlin and ended in ...........
So, - if a British Defense Minister had to resign his Cabinet Post for Financial Malfeasance why couldn't an American for either tragic Incompetence or an Agenda that has brought us to this?
There's one Problem I have with Mr Bymans Address - and if there was a Questions and Answers Session at the end I would ask.....
ReplyDeleteIf the US are seen to be consolidating with Israel aren't they playing into the Hands of the "Zionists of Israel" Conspiracy Theorists? That, in the past, Washington has called for Restraint in Jerusalem - which might not happen in this. That it could galvanize an already hostile People - across all Islamic Divides - against them, jeopardizing whatever Allegiances they have in the Region? That Cause will have that Effect?
I would also add that the last 2 Wars Hezbollah have had with Israel ended with the former winning on average - the first pushing the IDF back to the Israel-Lebanon Border, the second a Draw. This shows those "Zionists of Israel" Conspiracy Theorists - who think there's a Plan to ultimately turn the Levant (Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Remains of Palestine and Lebanon) into a Jewish Theme Park that they are wrong and most Jewish People are probably as fearful of all-out War with Hezbollah and their Proxies as anyone else with any sense.
Also, and this is if we continue to subscribe to the the official Story - if NORAD had successfully intercepted the Second (+ Third and Fourth) Aircraft when the Game was obvious after the First would either of the Towers have collapsed at all? Because the Second one struck was the First to collapse suggests that it was hit rather more severely, while the structural Damage done to the Foundations of the other one when it collapsed must have contributed to its eventual Demise. If neither had the Death Toll would have been far less - while probably none of the Emergency Crews who were there would have died at all.
ReplyDeleteThe tragic Irony is how the only Plane that was brought down by anything was no-where near anything, let alone the biggest Building in New York or Americas Defense Department.
Meanwhile, if Donald Rumsfelt can reduce his Departments Deficit from an estimated $3.4 Trillion to what Candidate Donald Trump put at about $200 Billion - with no visible Cuts in Expenditure (quite the opposite as the D,o,D spent more then than they ever had since the War of Independence) maybe he ought to have applied for any Countries Chancellor of the Exchequer Job. Heck, he did a better Job of the Defense Department Budget than Gordon Brown did our entire Economy. Liam Fox must be wondering why he resigned at all considering what Rumsfelt got away with in 2001.
Maybe someone should write a Book about this apparent economic Miracle - calling it "A Tale of 2 Donalds".
This - again - is if you completely subscribe to the official Story.
ReplyDeleteThat while there are these People who outwitted 4 Airforces, NORAD, Intel and Politicians - as 9/11 happened concurrent to a Plethora of military Exercises which might have helped facilitate the Attacks - then they might have had inside Information that these Exercises were scheduled for that day - and during that time of day. So not only did it show the Incompetence of the supposed Defense Infrastructure it also means that the Military had somehow been infiltrated.
This is if you subscribe to the official Story.
Also, if Explosions were heard - and seen - in the Lobby - or that there was one somewhere in the Basement - so devastating the Street collapsed - then this is what was planned in 1993 when Terrorists were going to detonate a Device that would shatter the central Pillar of the Building. The difference is - while that was an apparent Terrorist Attempt there were no concurrent military Exercises.
And it isn't just this Fella who would like an Apology from all sorts of People -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-detainee-apology-20150214-story.html
..... And I'm neither Moslem, Arabic or anything else you might attribute to these things. Considering the severe Disruption done to that Mans life not sure an Apology can repair that sort of Damage!
I can only sympathize for Abdul Aziz Al-Omari too!
How is an Apology going to make this right?
ReplyDeleteQuote; "The government's case eventually fell apart, but not before the husband and father had lost his family and livelihood."
What is Mr Kidd supposed to do now - pretend he's still married and have a Family? That'd be like John McCarthy pretending he and Jill Morrell are still an Item.
These are the other things that are wrong with what happened because of 9/11. Thousands of People suffering huge miscarriages of Justice because either the Agencies were ham-fisted and erroneous or those who have suffered because of the various anti-constitutional things that have been brought in since.
I could ask how they intend to repair the Damage done here because of it. Maybe we could exhume Mr Havel and pretend it's 1989 again. Why don't those People go to Dublin and pretend to greet Brian Keenan when he came home. How about re-enacting that Scene in the BBC Library when it was "Good News" that John McCarthy has come home.
Don't get me started on what has been happening here because of it (loads of Stuff on this Website about that).
Is the Info-ocracy going to delete all that horrible Culture that happened by default?
Someone commented in a 9/11 Documentary that time doesn't stand still - that to think it does because of it is very Americentric - that it continues - like it did for Mr Kidd when he went through his Divorce. Then you have John McCarthy's former Employer - as Jill Morrell observed; most of the Colleagues he knew before he went to Beirut had been replaced while he was a Hostage - so time didn't stand still at W.T.N either!
ReplyDeleteCulturally, I suppose we could always ask ISIS ever-so-politely to apologize for the wanton Vandalism done to very many ancient Artefacts - which will have to be replaced by Replicas once they are gone!
ReplyDeleteMaybe I could ask - ever-so-politely - if these horrible Yippies could - y'know, go home or something - who have appeared here by default!
ReplyDeleteWhat finally puts paid to any Gung-ho pro-War arguments that were bandied about in 2003-4, and quite nauseatingly still being so now - are the Refugees. What are they fleeing from? The Millions who have fled Syria hadn't fled before the Conflict - thus stayed put during the Assad Government - while the 800 who drowned in the Mediterranean recently didn't flee a Qaddafi who was killed a few years ago. All of this is becoming like a Vietnam War that became more difficult to hide after it had spilled over to Laos and Cambodia.
ReplyDeleteThe latter saw Sihanouks Government weakened and destabilized, and the subsequent rise of the Khymer Rouge. The comparisons to Iraq and Syria are apparent in how the Iraq War finally spilled over into Syria - while the Syrian Government were also compromised by internal Division and eventual Conflict. How Mosul in Iraq was engulfed in the War by cross Border Islamic Forces was the most startling Example of this. Cambodia got Pol Pot and the Khymer Rouge, Syria got IS!
It's difficult to know what Putin and Assad had to gain with any alleged Chemical Attacks in Douma on April 7th. It's also difficult to imagine how shrewd Politicians like Putin (probably the shrewdest in the World), and a Bashar Al Assad mindful of the Global focus on his War - would jeopardize recent Gains in the Conflict which has almost seen a complete Victory. Why jeopardize that for no strategic Gains at all?
ReplyDeleteWhat today's Events reveal is how quickly certain Leaders seem to be to go to War before exhausting any Inquiry into what happened a few days ago. This prompts questions about the validity of Claims the Chemical Attack was by Syrian Government Forces at all. People not only don't seem to have launched any in depth Investigation, while any military Action could destroy whatever Evidence there might be - irrespective of culpability. It's that promptness for War which causes concern about some sort of pre-emption by these so called "White Helmets".
That 'Rebels' are looking for Support as they face terminal rout adds grist to this Argument.
It does show how much Politicians have deteriorated in recent years and that it hasn't yet yielded an Equivalent of Bobby Kennedy and Anatoly Dobrinin to resolve the Crisis like they did that of Cuba 55 years ago!
Having just read an Article about Israeli Leader Benjamin Netenyahu saying he is "ready for WW3" suggests even he seems to suffer from a black gap in his memory of the current Syrian conflict. Speaking at the annual Holocaust Commemorations seemed ironic as it was Assad who dispatched Syrian Troops to protect Christians and other Groups from Islamist Fighters during the earlier phases of the War. The Kurdish People have offered Sanctuary to all sorts of same when Islamist Fighters were pitted against them. Very recently Turkish activity against Kurds has been at best ignored by Politicians.
All of this is reminiscent of People who spoke up for and did Stuff to help Jews during the Holocaust and considering the backdrop to Mr Netenyahu's Comments this makes his Stance somewhat paradoxical.
As I said, if we are poised for a global War then we ought have global Scrutiny first before a single shot is fired.
The Man who met Bush Snr at Malta in December 1989 must have been conscious of his historic Negotiations when he commented on the deterioration of Political Standards in recent Years. Also, while Mr Gorbachev will remember the Cold War it seems Mr Netenyahu has no Concept at all about the sort of World war that formed the backdrop to the Holocaust. The slaughter that amounted to Millions of Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, Communists etc was accelerated and made possible by WW2.
And while there might be some who do, and others who don't, have any Concept of World War, the WW2 Allies spent the last Months of it assiduously avoiding any Botch-ups. This is why I find it difficult to know why Assad would launch any sort of Chemical Attack on anyone when he is on the verge of a successful Conclusion to a Conflict that has gone on for nearly 10 years. Putin would advise him not to. If he didn't, it'd be like him using Chemical Weapons on Grozny when his War in Chechnya was almost finished.
In the end - they say the Truth is found in the Conclusion, and what would the Conclusion be to an Anglo-American 'Response' to supposed Chemical Weapons Attacks if it isn't to weaken the Government and bolster the Islamists? Which would please their Saudi Supporters immensely - while strengthening Israels Position in the Region.
Their (Israels) Wars with Syria were fought to a Conclusion that has meant they haven't fought Damascus for decades. Israelis living near the Golan Heights must be relieved at the years of Peace that has brought them and would probably prefer that to what could happen if Assad's Government collapsed. The Government in Jerusalem might enjoy the added Prestige but at what cost to other Jewish People?
I have to add here a Response to President Trumps Address which is all very emotive. He says that after WW1 we never wanted to see Chemical Weapons ever used again after 1 Million People died because of them. Someone somewhere sold those Chemical Weapons with "Made in USA" stamped on them, found by Troops during the Gulf War of 1991. Weapons that indirectly killed or debilitated more US Citizens because of 'Gulf War Syndrome' than they ever did Kurd's or Iraqis.
ReplyDeleteWhile Mr Netenyahu won't acknowledge that Assad and the Kurds prevented Holocausts of Yazidis, Christians and other Groups in Syria President Trump needs to talk to some of those former Republican Government ministers about some of this!
Has anyone gone into those Syrian Refugee Camps in Countries like Greece and asked them what ought to be done? In the end, they are what any War in Syria is about - not Donald Trump, Theresa May or anyone in Paris, Berlin or elsewhere. What would happen if they said Trump and May should butt out and leave Assad to finish his War (which he very nearly did) so they can go home and resume the lives they had before it all started? Syria's Population has depleted from about 24 - to 18 Million since this started, which means it has caused a Diaspora of almost as many as were Jews in the Holocaust.
ReplyDeleteWhat would happen if you did same with the many Libyans who have sailed the Mediterranean in flimsy Boats - the likes of which we haven't seen since those Boat People fleeing Vietnam in the 1970's. That they might curse Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for their blighted post-Ghadafy Lives?
And on it goes. That while America, Britain, France and others interfere in these Countries the Lives of Millions are destroyed by a few who are 1000's of Miles away from any Conflict.
That Trump tries being emotive on CNN makes it all look even more obscene - May following Suit makes it worse.
While Gorbachev berates modern Politicians for this, has anyone noticed that the new Breed of Politician, Socialist as well as Conservative, has had nothing to offer "their own" People but War and Austerity? Blair, Brown, Cameron, May, Bush Junior, Obama, Trump. Sarkosy, Hollande, Philipe, This has gone on for almost all of the 21st Century, and we have been at War longer that WW1, WW2, Korea and the 1990-91 Gulf War combined.
Is that all these People are there for now, to rubber Stamp the latest Money Maker for a Military industrial Complex even Eisenhower - Republican President and former SHAEF Leader - warned about in 1960? That a Journalist at any Press Conference hosted by them or Potentials in the future should ask them when in their Term of office will we have the inevitable War (y'know, so we can make the necessary Arrangements).
Maybe Private Eye should run a Cartoon or one of those classic front Pages showing the CEO's of the big 4 (Lockheed Martin, Hughes, McDonald Douglas, and Fairchild Republic) having their worst Nightmare. That squiggly Line showing Sales Figures plummeting because Assad has won his War and they might have to sell the Big Issue and their Wives sell their Jewelry to make Ends meet. Then, next Week they could have one showing wealthy Frankfurt Business People having to drive around Athens in their Porsche's - giving Food to Homeless Greeks because Syrian Refugees have been able to go home!
Here's something too .......
ReplyDeleteWhile the West backs the Terrorists via Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the US and even Israel (where things really have got surreal) their Proxies and even the USA have been bombing the very People who helped facilitate the Release of many Hostages in Beirut. Almost all of them came home via Damascus. When I was listening to the Who's "We don't get fooled again" on YuoTube the Algorhythm automatically selected "Sultans of swing" by dire Straits to play afterwards. That was the song Brian Keenan remembers hearing when he was a Hostage - which always seemed to be playing on a radio he could hear. Hmmm, so - is this some sort of Game where we - as Jim Kerr implored in "Live in the City of light" we always seem to end up on the wrong side? That while someone lumps Native Americans in with the sort of People you might find in ISIS this does People with Lebanese Kidnappers?
I was watching something else where it auto-selected something about ancient Egypt. Home of those who worshiped the Goddess ISIS. In the context of the above it suggests a sort of streaming Process that has nothing to do with Audio-Visual.
As someone who represented those Hostages maybe Russians who support those who did help Hostages should write an Algorithm or even a Website that does all the things YouTube does - but without all this!
Finally, here was something that was published on the 15th Anniversary of the Iraq War. It was written by someone from the Iraqi Diaspora - who like many who opposed the conflict (including me) was against it, but in no way a Saddam apologist. Quite the opposite ......
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-anniversary-.html
Here's another ..................
ReplyDeletehttps://www.vox.com/2018/5/25/17394466/john-mccain-memoir-iraq-war-mistake
Having read about recent Exploits by the IDF in Syria some of us remember that the last time Syria and Israel fought a War it was the end of Yom Kipur in 1973.(although they'd rather we didn't). They might have spent the years since glowering at each other on the Golan Heights - but it never amounted to more than that. There was even the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) of 1974.
ReplyDeleteThe only time they did Israel had invaded Lebanon in 1982 to fight the PLO - and Syria sent Planes to assist the Lebanese, but there was never a direct Israeli-Syrian Conflict .........
Until now!
Also, when Syria forced the Pax Syriana in Lebanon in 1976 - to end a year of Bloodshed and Slaughter between myriad Militias - they had the full Support of the West. Even the US had a Carrier Fleet off the Lebanese Coast and offered some Assistance. Assad quite adroitly declined - the Factionalization making his Job difficult enough without being called an American Stooge.
When Hostages were released at the end of the 1980's almost all of them did so via Damascus - not Jerusalem, while Syria now is full of People who would do the Kidnappings not try and end them.
What irks me about the last 15 years of War is how - when you try and mention this Stuff the Crap starts. They claim the Wars are about Democracy - but what Democracy exists when you can vote for anyone - as long as it's Jerusalem? What does Israel do against non-Arabs, non Moslems, non-Citizens of Arabia/North Africa who might oppose a War which treats everyone like Fodder for the Kosher Meat Grinder? When I vote in an Election I do so to put someone in Parliament - not the Knesset!
While Mr Ordievski gives People like Peter Jackson $300,000,000 to make his pro-war Films how abut these local Film makers in the Photograph?
Here's an Update ........
ReplyDeleteIn the final Analysis what made the recent Wars so painful and insulting was how they ended. Saddam was captured and tried without any input from any of the Aggrieved. That we had been sold this War on everything from his supposed (non existent) support of Al Qaida to his Treatment of Opposition People and the Kurds.
Then, after an unknown and incalculable number of Dead, Maimed and Missing, who knows how many Millions becoming Refugees, and all that Destruction and archaeological Vandalism - in the end a small Team of US Navy Seals allegedly assassinate Osama Bin Laden.
10's of Millions whose lives were irreparably damaged could now ask "Why didn't you do that first?"
In other Words - if it was that easy, and that cheap, why didn't you do that instead of the Death and Devastation we did have? While the Human Cost in the Region is so huge it's incalculable, the fiscal and moral reputational Cost it inflicted on some western Countries will take years to make right. How many Supporters of the War in 2003 cursed the Government for Austerity and the Bedroom Tax a few years later? the thing is, where do you suppose the Money came from to pay for those Conflicts and how do suppose the Government will attempt to recoup it?
Then there is that Human Cost .....
No-one has published the definitive figure for Casualties in those Wars. Those killed and those injured - physically and psychologically. It would be bad enough in our comparatively loose Society but the regions of Arabia and North Africa can have 4 Generations of Family living in the same House. That they are bigger on the extended Family than we are. So whoever's Figures you believe every one of them has all that Family attached to it. All of whom affected by the Loss caused by the War, either in Death of having to care for an injured Relative. Couple this with the devastated Infrastructure and it becomes even more acute.
And how about that Infrastructure?
In some ways what has happened is worse than WW1 and 2. The Villages and Towns of Flanders and North East France were rebuilt and People returned to live in them after WW1. Ypres is still the bustling Market Town it was in early 1914. Those of Britain and Europe after WW2 were the same. Coventry, Caen, Dresden, Berlin all continued after 1945 much the same as they were in 1939. The former German capital might have looked like a BMW grafted onto a Trabant because of the Cold War - but it still functioned as a City. Despite the political tumult of the late 1940's devastated Warsaw had its Citizens return and rebuild. Leningrad was the same, rebuilt in both Building and People after the Siege, and even though every Building suffered Damage People still repopulated and rebuilt Stalingrad. Pearl Harbour is still the US Navy's biggest Base in the Pacific.
There are Areas and People of Iraq and Syria that will never go back to being what they were before the Wars. Many are resigned to being an almost permanent Diaspora, one that equals the Holocaust in Number.
I've just read something about the START Treaty, the Result of the Meeting former President Obama had with Dimitri Medveyev. Much as any Washington-Moscow Negotiations are positive, a Treaty which only deals with long range Nuclear Weapons doesn't really reduce the Risk. Short to medium range Weapons are what would be used in any first Strike Scenario, and this would happen in the Region's where former Warsaw Pact meets NATO. Because of this any Treaty should be a Continu'um of that signed by Gorbachev, former Soviets and NATO in Malta 30 years ago. This not only dealt with ALL Nuclear Weapons, but also with conventional Forces (the CFE Treaty). That finally addressed the Causes of any potential Conflict as well as the Weapons that would he used to fight it. Merely negotiating those that the M.A.D Doctrine always said would never be used, and have proved to be no Deterrent in all Cold War Era Conflicts just skims the Surface!
ReplyDeleteThe most dangerous Weapons are the ones the the Military deem safe to use. One of these was the Neutron Bomb - designed to kill People but not damage Buildings etc. The Problem facing the START Treaty is that it deals mainly with Weapons that are the inevitable Conclusion to this. That what might start as a conventional War, then limited Nuclear War, will finally become an intercontinental one. Hiroshima and Nagasaki started with a Battle in Ethiopia, a Germano-Polish Border Skirmish and Pearl Harbour. The Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved by America withdrawing medium range Jupiter Missiles from Turkey.
ReplyDeleteAny Russo-American Treaty should have the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty as it's Foundation otherwise it is rendered meaningless. The War to end all Wars was started by a few Gunshots in Sarajevo.
I was a bit disappointed to hear what sounded like John Prescott on the Radio saying how Social Media is used by Labour. People don't vote for ethically ambiguous multi-billionaire Internet Entrepreneurs like Zuckerberg who could turn into something from "Halloween 3", they vote for a Party that might have some Solutions to today's Problems.
ReplyDeleteWhile Mr Prescott seemed willing to sacrifice Parliamentary Sovereignty to Facebook etc (a Cop out) he must be aware that Zuckerberg has been called before Congressional Committees in the US asking Questions about everything from Censorship to Privacy.
Shame the former deputy Prime Minister couldn't have used his Influence to relaunch a Community Media Project in Bristol. The Office Entrance is now somewhere slept in by the Homeless. It is considerably better and inclusive for those participating and a helluva lot cheaper than the most disastrous Foreign Policy Blunder of recent History
Those US congressional Committees can be very effective ..... Keyfauver and Organized Crime, Anti Trust and Bill Gates, there were even thoughts that one might be formed to ask Media Moguls why they propogated the recent War. They aren't like those we have here, which hypes the Public into believing something is being done (Leveson, Chilcot etc). Before Mr Prescott allows Britain's Opposition to become the Facebook Party maybe he should talk to a Veteran of these things ..... Jay Rockefeller!
ReplyDeleteThere might be a time when we expect a Committee that might actually do something!
To confirm I have a Theory about Conspiracy Theorists, and ask who might be behind some supposed Alternative Media I get an Email from someone called "One last thing". This Months has a Piece called "Ebay for Dictators" where he is critical of Venezuelan Leader Nicolas Maduro selling the Countries Gold Reserve. Gordon Brown didn't do this with ours of course.
ReplyDeleteHere's a Documentary by acclaimed Film Maker Oliver Stone which explores Americas direct Involvement in inflicting its Will on other Countries and indirectly interfering with other Countries Democracy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZBRcdy7ndI&t=1410s
Right at the Start that is the same GWB who became President that Year huh?????
No-one is saying Russia has all the Answers or is right but in the Neo-Cold War it seems the Propaganda has resembles something some of us remember before 1989-91!
https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/iraq-what-happened-to-the-oil-after-the-war-62188
ReplyDeleteHere is why David Ormsby Gore always used to advise Kennedy against Oil Barrel Politics as a Motive for War. To assume Invasion, Occupation and Appropriation of a Country and it's Resources is a very 19th Century Notion and while Kennedy ran America in the early 1960's the Problems facing Iraq are even more complex in the increased Globalisation of the last 30 years. Oil hasn't unified the Country although it creates the Impression that it ought to and it's regional distribution could even increase its Partition as each Group vies for control of it.
The Kurdish KRG have discovered that this is also rather deceptive. What at first might look like a Guarantee towards ambitions of Independence has gradually been handed to Turkish Companies which is one of the Region's biggest Paradoxes.
So, even if Oil Politics were a Key Motive for the 2003 War Bush and Blair weren't particularly good at it!
I mentioned here before what I thought ought to be done which doesn't involve Oil at all ....... and no War!
ReplyDeleteMost of Iraq is Shia Moslem which means leanings towards Iran. Saddam only kept his Tikrit Sunni Government in Power by Repression and Force. The Ayatollah Khomeini died in 1989 and Iran renewed Relations with the West with a new Leader, Rafsanjani.
By the end of the 20th Century Iran was led by increasingly reformist Governments like Ahmed Khatami, whose Reforms earned him the Support of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. This is when the West ought to have capitalised. Forging further Relations with Tehran.
While this happens that majority Shia Population in Iraq see it and Saddam has to acknowledge it. The unprecedented happens as he turns to the same West that supplied him during the Iran-Iraq War. Suddenly he becomes more pliable while caught in a diplomatic Pincer. He might remember how almost all his Airforce flew to Iran during the first Gulf War and how the same might happen via Shia Islam with Millions of his People.
He is left with no Choice but reform.
Before that Saddam benefitted from the West's Enmity with Iran as much as anyone else. Enmity with them meant Enmity with most of his People too. But what happens if that is gone?
ReplyDeleteInstead, GWB declares War with Iraq and lumps Iran in with "Axis of Evil". Reformists in Tehran are marginalised, Relations with the West collapse and a radicalised Country chooses former Revolutionary Guards as it's Government! Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was one of those who took over 100 Americans Hostage in the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979.
While Tony Blair seemed to have slithered out of being indicted as a War Criminal who lied to sell a War that even Veterans of say was a Mistake , George Robertson should face Questions about both Integrity and Competence as NATO Secretary General. His Job was to work within the Treaties his Employer were bound to and the Malta CFE Treaty was probably the most significant.
ReplyDeleteMeant as a Strategy to end the Cold War it was supposed to prevent what happened in Georgia in 2007. George Robertson was supposed to work within it in any Dealings with the Tblisi Government. Because it strongly advised the former Warsaw Pact and Soviet Republics from being in any Military Alliance or Bloc Robertson should have made it very clear to Sakashvili that his attempts to join NATO were in breach of it.
He didn't!
By failing to implement the CFE Treaty in Europe, and guaranteeing Neutrality with former Warsaw Pact and Soviet Countries, the Politicians who allowed NATO to spread into those Regions justified Stalin's Policy for post-war Europe. Using eastern Europe as a Buffer against further German Aggression.
ReplyDeleteWho is NATO deployed against? Why did Vaclav Havel suggest it be dismantled once the Warsaw Pact was gone?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881/amp
ReplyDeleteCause and Effect ......
ReplyDeleteWhen you consider the Causes of the 2 biggest recent Conflicts they prompt Questions about proportional Response.
The Gulf of Tonkin Incident which sparked the 10 year War in Vietnam and Cambodia, killing more than 3 Million People, causing the rise of the Khymer Rouge in Cambodia which killed Millions more, left a Generation of Americans scarred for life, Crippled Casualties of Agent Orange and a Country littered with the Detrius of War claimed no American Lives and did minimal Damage to a US Warship. There was even some Provocation in the Pre-amble as South Vietnam had launched several Commando Raids on North Vietnam while the USS Maddox deliberately sailed into north Vietnamese Seas.
The Destroyer was observed by North Vietnamese MTBs, the former opening fire. The latter retaliated by launching Torpedo's and firing their Deck mounted Machine Guns. The Americans continued to fire and called in an Airstrike. The Result left the MTBs in retreat severely damaged and one was sunk. The Americans suffered no Casualties and a single Bullet Hole in the Ships Superstructure.
There was a supposed second Engagement which Robert McNamara admitted never happened.
What came next might have been farcical were it not so tragic.
The US Marines approached the Beach at Da Nang, set to assault it "Saving Private Ryan" style, and when the Ramp dropped and they charged onto the Sand they were greeted by beautiful Vietnamese Women, the Mayor and the Town Band. General Frederick Karch looked very unimpressed draped in Garlands of Flowers with Vietnamese Ladies. The rest of the War would be anything but funny.
In 1992 Al Qaida attempted a Bombing at a Hotel in Yemen meant to kill 100's of American Troops staying there. It didn't but the Attempt was made.
There was no Response
In 1993 they exploded a Car Bomb in the Car Park of the World Trade Center, killing 6 and injuring 1500.
Again, no Response.
In 1995 a Car Bomb in Riyadh killed 5 Americans, 2 Indians and wounded 60 others.
Yet again, no Response.
In 1998 Bombs were detonated at the US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, killing 224 and injuring more than 5000.
Nothing was done even though these were non-combatants and the Sanctity of Diplomacy had been violated.
So the Vietnam War was caused by no Casualties and minimal Damage while no Attempt was made to neutralise Al Qaida even though they had killed nearly 300 People and wounded more than 7000.
Then you had the War in Iraq ....
We were told about Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction, sold to him by America and other western Countries. He used them in his War with Iran which we supported. Some were discovered when the Ground War started in 1990. By the time Troops went into Iraq in 2004 Bunkers that were used to store these were empty. Hinges on Doors to these were rusty, suggesting that they hadn't been used for years so Saddam hadn't just removed them. It started to look like he had complied with UN Directives to dispose of them after all.
If he did have them when the Iraq War started why didn't he use them????
From Munich to 2016 ......
ReplyDeleteThe Election of President Trump was an historical Irony. 2016 saw the Election of what some describe as a Nationalist, who is anti-imigration and wanted to build a Wall along the Rio Grande.
Except, it wasn't as cut and dried as it seemed.
It was Munich 1938 and Chamberlain and Daladier were at a Summit with Adolf Hitler - brokered by Mussolini, and attended by Czechoslovakia's Foreign Minister Jan Masaryck. The Anglo-French Politicians were duped by Hitler whose claim to the Sudeten was merely a reunification of German People with Germany. ...... At least, that is what he told them!
History told us something different.
The thing is, you only had to see what he and Mussolini were up to in Spain and the Horn of Africa to realise what the Agenda was going to be. Combine this with their Alliance with Japan and their Activities in Manchuria and the Intention was obvious. The Proto-Holocaust of the 1930's was also conclusive Proof of what was going to happen.
The World was heading for War.
What was Hillary Clinton up to as DOD Secretary? When she wasn't provoking Russia she was provoking Iran. She was responsible for the Morass that is Libya and the Assassination of Ghadafy. Subsequently it became another Iraq and Syria, the latter another part of the same Agenda.
Seeing what she was doing showed what a Clinton Presidency would mean.
War with Russia and/or Iran and huge Supplies of Arms to Libya to control the 'Insurgency'.
Trump didn't get his Wall, after all who is going to pay for it? Congress won't fund it federally while it would be far too expensive for a private sector wanting to make Money.
But concurrent to that Hillary didn't get her War either!
Meanwhile, it seems an American Archeologist called Diane Siebrandt is being touted as a female Indiana Jones. The tacky Veneer of Hollywood Schmaltz goes everywhere, but none of it can hide the current Unrest in the Country or the Fact that Iraq's Museums were looted after Saddam's Regime collapsed.
ReplyDeleteThe current Protests are typical of the Convolutions of Loyalties and Antagonisms in post-war Iraq. Some are Sunnis protesting at an Iranian Bias with the majority Shia (which anyone studying Demographics could have told Bush about in 2003), to Corruption and an American Bias (there's a Surprise) and how the Oil rich Basra Region doesn't benefit the People living there (yet another Surprise), and how it all looks like Iraqi Nationalism - which is the inevitable Consequence of all of this.
That there is inadequate provision of essential Infrastructure is probably one of the worst Contentions. That that should still be the case years after the apparent end to the Conflict in Areas miles away from troubled Cities like Mosul speaks of Negligence.
But heck, if Diane Siebrandt can strut about with a Fedora, Leather Jacket and Bull Whip who's gonna notice as they watch As Sign Ment on YouTube huh!
I've mentioned before that the Key to resolving Iraq without the disruption and devastation might have been Iran.
ReplyDeleteAlthough recent Protests are partially against a perceived Iran Bias, to deal with Tehran isn't the same thing.
Instead of lumping Iran in with his "Axis of Evil" GWB ought to have supported the Reformist Government of Ahmed Khatami. More importantly, he ought to have been seen to be doing it, particularly in Iraq. Saddam's biggest Ploy was always western Antagonism to the Theocracy in Iran, with the West providing him with fiscal and political Support in the 1980's. Even after the 1st Gulf War of 1990-1 he could still say "the West might not like me, but they also still don't like the Iranians". Thus he could be complacent about his own Shia Majority and how he could continue with Sunni leadership.
That changes if he saw the Shia Government in Iran being courted by the West, because Shias in Iraq would be encouraged by it. Subsequently, he might admit more Shias to the Army, various other administrative and legal Positions, and be rather more pliable.
Sunnis wouldn't be like they are now, because they still have a Sunni Government and a Country they see as run by Iraqis - thus, staving off Nationalism.
The Infrastructure would still be intact as would a Society some are feeling nostalgic for!
At least it isn't street Musicians in New York, crappy Articles in local Magazines, and Songs about Statues huh!
ReplyDelete"No War" in Cymraig .....
ReplyDeleteIt's all getting a bit spooky around here isn't it!
One of the bitterest Ironies of post-War Iraq is how Consumerism was used to attempt a similar Veneer of Civicness as Saddam's Ba'athism was used to obscure the very apparent ethnic and religious divides.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is, while you might be able to go to one of the new Palaces, the Shopping Malls, which glisten in the Arabian Heat there might not be Water in the Faucet, no Energy or Fuel to cook with, stuttering Health provision, and the continuing Threat of War.
You can go and spend Money at these Places, but potential to earn any is still minimal in some Areas.
The elected Governments since 2005 do so on a Mandate based on a Constitution that was rushed through that year, before the Insurgencies everyone said would happen really started. This was no 1945 post-War Europe or Asia, or a fledgling America in the late 1770s.
The Question here is; how much of what is available in these Shopping Malls is indigenous Goods sold by Iraqi owned Businesses? If it isn't you have given the Iraqis a double Whammy - where the Country can't make an Income from its own Produce and many don't have an Income sufficient enough to spend in them.
ReplyDeleteI write as a Musician and 15 years after the end of the Cold War I met eastern Europeans miffed at how their superb Music was being ignored by certain Music Media TV. It was like the end of Communism merely cleared the way to create new Markets for NSync and Britney Spears at the expense of their Music. I have tons of it from former Warsaw Pact Countries - of many Genres - and it is awesome. There are former dissident Punk Bands to Czechish Vocalists as good as anything Anglo-America can do, but they are being sold a Product whose Offices are in LA.
When you do similar in fractious Countries emerging from War it is potentially disastrous! Marshall Aid across all of post-WW2 Europe and Japan prevented their Recidivism to Conflict and created or rehabilitated some of the most successful Companies in the World. This is what they needed to do in Iraq rather than use it as somewhere else to sell western Goods. There is is the added Cultural Difference too, which might have been better observed by indigenous Companies.
Marshall Aid was applied for several Reasons, and not just to former Axis Countries.
ReplyDeleteThe Fear wasn't just how former Axis Countries laid waste might become belligerent again, and fascist, they might also go Communist. This was particularly possible in France, Germany, Greece and Italy. Thus, it was also given to former Allies too.
Also, how easy might it have been to have flooded Europe with GEC and General Motors instead of the Companies that did emerge or reinvent themselves in the late 1940's. Very, but how was the Continent going to repair itself if all Monies went back to America? How was Germany going to pay Reparations if that happened?
A Commentator described the end of WW2 as a European Civil War that started in 1918. That the Winners were the USA and Soviet Union. The West's handling of post-War Europe was rather more adroit than the Soviets, and while Aid funded Rehabilitation the Soviets merely acted like an Empire, plundering Warsaw Pact Countries and oppressing them. Thus, the West won the Propaganda War.
It's a shame that this wasn't applied to post-war Iraq. If it had the Insurgencies might not have been as potent or ferocious and there might not be the Unrest they have now. Firing the General who defeated ISIL beggars belief in this Context.
Also, in the far East in 1945 Louis Mountbatten enlisted the Support of a far more strident and fanatical former Enemy. Realising that British and Commonwealth Troops weren't numerous enough to administer the huge Region of Asia he had inherited on VJ Day he used Soldiers of the former imperial Japanese Army. Thus, he prevented the Region from descending into a hotch potch of Civil Wars.
There were Officers of Saddam's former Army who offered to help in the rehabilitation of Iraq. Maybe if that had been taken up by People like David Patreuos some of the Devastation that happened after 2005 might have been avoided.
What if America said to Turin, Italy "We're closing Fiat and we're opening a Ford Plant instead"? Or Fiat was owned by them? What if the same happened in France with Renault and Citroen? Or General Motors turned BMW into Buick? That any or all consumer Electronics made and sold in Europe was GEC owned?
ReplyDeleteThey didn't, and they knew what might happen if they did! Exactly the same thing that is happening in Iraq now with huge Nationalist Protests.
How about Religion?
Most modern Iraqis are comparatively secular. The Protests are partially about this. Imperial Japan was a Theocracy - who fought and died in their Millions for the living God - Emperor Hirohito. Despite this Mountbatten used former Imperial Troops in Asia and General Douglas McArthur achieved Peace and Prosperity in post-War Japan. Why did they achieve in just a few Years what Patreuos has yet to in Iraq?
I also notice the Scarcity of Articles on the Web about those former Saddam Officers offering to help in post-War Iraq. Seems they have been deleted.
Also, the West and America particularly is losing the post-Cold War Propaganda Campaign because it is making the same Mistakes the Soviet Union made before it's end. It has become an Empire in the last 30 years run by People without the self-awareness to realize it.
NATO in former Soviet Countries says to Moscow, Stalin was right - who then had his European Buffer against what he thought might be more German Aggression. Except this time the Expansion isn't coming from Berlin, it is coming from the dominant Force in NATO - which is who? Thus, if you don't learn from History you are doomed to repeat it. The 40 year Soviet Occupation of eastern Europe started with the Annexation and Dissection of Poland and Operation Barbarossa in 1941 by Hitler, not Zhukov's March to Germany in 1944-5.
That Region ought to have remained staunchly neutral after 1989, as decided by the CFE Treaty!
Meanwhile, in a Fit of Pique President Trump is relocating 2000 American Companies from China to India. Wonder how they're going to see that in Pakistan? The fragile Balance in the forgotten Cold War, that of India and Pakistan, has only been retained by the current Arrangement. Pakistan was poised to go to War with America a few years ago and the US installed Government in Kabul were going to support them.
ReplyDeleteWhat if they see India cozying up to America too much? Not only will it prompt anti-American Sentiment in Pakistan, it could also undo any Progress they made in Afghanistan.
This could throw the whole Region into catastrophe!
As 30 years ago seemed to be the Zenith of how things should be, from Bush-Gorbechev ending the Cold War, the end of Apartheid, the moderation of post-Ayatollah Iran, Hostages coming home and many other things - what has changed?
ReplyDeleteI ask this because while the World got it right a War was going on in the Gulf. It was the first Gulf War where Saddam had invaded Kuwait and a huge Coalition was poised to eject him. Moscow backed the UN Resolutions against him, Syria supported the Coalition and Iraqi Planes fled to former Enemy Iran. The War was comparatively straight forward - as was it's Morality. I supported it because it was a Response to an illegal Invasion.
Others didn't, but despite its legitimacy opposing it didn't affect any aspect of your Life. No one accused you of everything from anti-Semitism to Terrorism.
Now, if you opposed the recent Conflict you are called either, or both. Or, you have to be part of some Ocracy if you do.
Why??????
Meanwhile, People might say that a Hillary Presidency could have provided the Medicare needed to deal with the Covid19 Health Crisis, except most of that would have been used up treating the Victims of her War with Russia and/or Iran. And that's assuming it didn't become Nuclear!
ReplyDeleteDuring the Flu Pandemic of 1918, which was concurrent with WW1 - and didn't even have the potential to be nuclear - the Federal Government were completely absorbed into dealing with the Disease in the armed Forces - at home and abroad. The Civilians had to rely on what Measures each Town, City or State implemented. It would have been the same now had the War been a conventional one. Had it been nuclear you wouldn't be alive to read this, no-one would, and I wouldn't be to write it.
Meanwhile, are they spoiling for a War with China?
ReplyDeleteI've just seen a Documentary which effectively accuses the Government in Beijing of creating the Covid19 Virus and either spreading it, or causing Inertia as it made its exponential Journey through Humanity. President Trump insists he has seen Evidence of this while Scott Morrison - Australian PM says he hasn't.
Is this "Axis of Evil" the Sequel?
The Program looks very slick, far more than anything else by professional Broadcasters and Reporters, including Channel 4, the tenaciously brilliant People at "4 Corners" and the BBC. The Journalist looks and sounds like an Actor while the closing Credit Sequence might have been done by Hans Zimmer. It all looks and sounds very Hollywood and seems like the 'Production' responsible for "Axis of Evil" is at it again.
The Interviewees are intriguing.
Why is that former NSA General saying that to the Camera and not his former Boss? Another sounds like he's got a Script from GWB or Dick Cheney.
How did a Production Team glean all that info in just a few Weeks when the Security Agencies couldn't seem to in Years?
So are we being conditioned for a War with China?
The thing is, while Saddam only had fictitious WMD's the Chinese have very real ones. So did Iran and North Korea in "Axis of Evil 1" but saner Voices just about cut through the Madness and War was avoided.
A War with China can only end in one Conclusion. The so called reassurances about Nuclear War - "Duck and cover", "Protect and survive" - Shelters, Food and Medicine Stocks - are all Bulshit. It isn't the Blast, the Fire, the Fall out, Radiation or lack of Civic Order or Infrastructure that will kill ALL of us. It's the Nuclear Winter that follows. Dust in the Stratosphere that causes Years of Darkness and Cold where no Sunlight reaches the Earth. Everything dies, Flora and Fauna, there is no Food, no Warmth no Photosythesis, no Vitamins.
People are surviving Covid19, who have recovered and now immune, and then share that with others in the form of Transfusions and Serum. Treatments are being developed and a Vaccine isn't that far off. The Lockdowns are as much of an Inconvenience as Rationing during WW2, but we got through that hopefully a better People.
NO-ONE will get through a War with China
I'm totally for People knowing what happened with this Virus, but there's a huge difference between what REALLY happened, and what 'really' happened.
ReplyDeleteIf all they get is the latter then who is to say it won't happen again?
It's like, how many Islamic Terrorist Incidents have happened after Saddam was executed on December 30th 2006? We had the London Tube Bombing in July 2007 - just one of many everywhere. As soon as this happened GWB's Claim that he was responsible for Al Qaida was shown to be wrong.
There are Accusations of malpractice and supression by the Chinese Government, mostly because of Prestige and Propaganda - but what were our Intel Communities up to on and before 9/11? Then in all the years after?
ReplyDeleteI've drawn Comparisons between now and 30 years ago, and the main thing I was doing concurrently to the first Gulf War was a Campaign to free Hostages kept by Islamic Extremists in Lebanon.
How did I get lumped in with the latter in the years since?
As a - erm - Symptom of the current Wrongs by Beijing involves supression of Social Media from People critical of the Government's handling of the Crisis everyone reading this who know that I'm right, and speak the Truth, will now share it on their various Social Media Accounts.
If not why not?
You're not worried about being shunned, or worse, by Government Agencies are you? Worried that you might not get that Career Advancement? Or maybe your Account might be deleted.
ReplyDeleteOne thing is certain.
You can't accuse me of being viral!
There's an intriguing Documentary on YouTube called "China's Secrets" about a Chinese Spy who had defected to Australia and divulged what he used to do when working for Beijing.
ReplyDeleteIt claims the Australian Government had been infiltrated by China.
The thing is, it was posted on YouTube 5 Months ago which in the current Context makes it prehistoric. Comments have been switched off too.
Were the Allegations true it would severely undermine the Credibility of Scott Morrisons Government. It hasn't, and the Australian PM is unflinching in the Crisis that has prompted America's Accusations that China deliberately created and spread the Virus. If the Program had any Gravitas wouldn't Morrison have to either resign or support the American Claims? Wouldn't Australian Media be calling for a Vote of no Confidence and an Election?
Wouldn't they be using any and every Opportunity to put this to the PM and his Cabinet?
They aren't either.
Is there a concerted Effort to turn Covid19 into a Pearl Harbour and prompt a War with the Chinese?
The thing is, if this apparent Spy is what he claims Morrison would have to resign in a Scandal that makes the Profumo Affair look tame by comparison.
The Fact he hasn't speaks Volumes about his skepticism about China's deliberate infliction of the Virus.
Meanwhile, Jerry Bruckheimer might have made his Film "Pearl Harbour" but what would he have to say about Zuckerbergs Invasion of Hawaii? Apparently, the Facebook Entrepreneur has bought an Island there and built a huge Wall around his House much to the Chagrin of the Natives!
ReplyDeleteAs the Blame is being thrown around like Custard Pies at a Circus between China and increasing amounts of the World, the Farce might be funny if it hadn't been so tragic.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the Spooks - those 'all seeing 5 Is' we always hear about were in the Opium Dens of Hubei when People spluttered and died in Wuhans Streets. Maybe they thought Xi was throwing a Quatermass Fancy Dress Party when Soldiers in full PPE set up Roadblocks at the Provinces Borders. Perhaps they expected him to appear clutching a Bottle of Sake in a Party Hat, blowing one of those Rasps that unroll, "bang" goes a Party Popper. Maybe George Christiansen was in a Manila Brothel when China bought Australia ......
The thing is, the Pre-amble made all of this plausible.
Some macho bollux Hollywood Schmaltz shows 'US Navy Seals' eliminate "Osama". Chuck Norris auditioned but he was too old. Then we are told Bin Laden's Body was dumped in the Sea.
It's April 1882 and the Body of Jesse James is put on display. People rather ghoulishly have their Photo taken with it. The Stench must have been awful in those pre-refrigerated days before the most basic of Air Conditioning. Many thought it distasteful, half of America thought he was a Hero.
Bin Laden certainly wasn't, and while his alleged, it says here, so we were told, Body was dumped in the Sea, it was so in an Age of Deep Freezers, Science working with ancient DNA, and ultra advanced Forensics. So they couldn't have brought it back and displayed it at NYC's Ground Zero so America can have Closure? Or at least recorded as such by the US Surgeon General.
And how about that 'Assassination"?
US Navy Seals' the best of America's best, up there with our Special Air and Boat Services. Equipped with Satellite Phones, GPS, Night Vision, the latest Scopes and Firearms, Tazers if they need them, Computers, Kevlar Helicopters and Jet Aircraft couldn't have caught him alive?
It was 1945 and the most notorious Nazis were in the Dock at Nuremberg. Goering, Doenitz, Hess, Speer to name but a few. All of them had been caught and arrested in an Age of Propellor Planes and Landline Telephones.
Simon Wiesenthals People caught War Criminals in South America and deep in the Soviet Union using 1960s Technology, bringing them back for Trial in Israel.
But no-one could do same with Osama!!!!
How about Saddam? Why weren't the Victims of his Regime given Closure about his Guilt? Why were the Public denied knowing if he ever planned to WMD the World? Maybe his Lawyers might have called Donald Rumsfeld to the Stand as a Witness.
When Muammar Ghaddafy had that Knife shoved up his Posterior the People of Lockerbie would never have the definative Answer about who was responsible for Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988.
And to think, Albert Anastasia merely threw Abe Reles from a Window!!!!!
I have mentioned this before - I will mention it again!
ReplyDeleteThe amount of pro-War Armchair Generals I met after I wrote a very long Piece about the Iraq War was incredible. Not sure who was sending them, the Government, Military Industrial Complex, People reclining in Middle England's pleasant Shires, thinking it was all a good Idea etc.
2003 was 18 years ago, so how old were these People then?
If they were from 16 - 50, fit, with no unspent Convictions and no Tattoos above the Collar they could have joined the Territorial Army as a Reservist. This wouldn't have impacted their Job or Business, unless they were called to active Duty in Iraq or sent to cover other Tasks by those who were.
Ahhh, not so enthusiastic all of a sudden, particularly if they see US National Guards Men serving there.
How about buying a House there, if - after all, everyone is sooo happy, and the Country is sooo free, and it has become the post-Saddam Paradise on Earth? Heck, y'know - lead by example, what's good enough for the Iraqis is good enough for you etc!
What I have noticed is how, even when the Internet is crammed with Page after Page of Google Entries telling you why the War was wrong, a Mistake etc, you still get the pro-Warrers acting up like they used to.
Meanwhile, it seems the pro-Warrers are still at it.
ReplyDeleteThe thing is, while the World was denied Closure on Osama, Saddam and Qadaffi even the lowliest Legal Practitioner would say about Bin Laden there is no Habeus Corpus Mr President because you threw the 'Corpus' into the Sea. (Or at least, so we were told, it says here, apparently, allegedly). Instead of having conclusive proof that Osama had been captured and killed the World was fobbed off with a crappy Film.
Iran never got Closure on Saddam's use of Chemical Weapons in the Iran-Iraq War, the Kurds never did either for Halabja or the Anfal Genocide amongst others, the Iraqi People didn't for Decades of Oppression, Kuwaitis scarred by the Iraqi Occupation of 1990-91 didn't.
Lockerbie never got Closure when the Libyan Leader was unceremoniously executed by American backed Rebels and on it all went.
If you are going to inflict that much damage, loss of Life, disruption, and Misery on Afghanistan, Arabia and North Africa, if you are going to tax your own People to the tune of Trillions of Currency Units and expect them to fight, you should give the People what they deserve.
The damage done in Europe, Russia and the far East to bring down Germany, Italy and Japan was collosal. The Loss of Life stupifying, the Money spent exhaustive - particularly to Britain, her Commonwealth Allies and the Soviet Union, but at the end the People were given what they deserved. Everyone from Goering to Speer at Nuremberg on trial for War Crimes. Stalin wanted them all summarily executed, Churchill stopped him.
If you were going to inflict as much division on your People, those for, those against, you at least have the decency to provide Proof so either can draw their own Conclusion.
They didn't do any of it!
And as for that Film. I'm sure Beavis and Butthead couldn't see the difference - but there is a huge difference between a Native American Warrior dying in a Concentration Camp in his own Country, and a foreign Mercenary Terrorist allegedly being killed in someone else's!
I hope every Native American who saw that Trash wrote to the Studio demanding the Film Makers resignation.
And when I say Native Americans, be they People like Chief Joseph or Sitting Bull, I mean Native Americans not some Bloke who ran a Pub in Whitetown or even those "Special Occasions".
ReplyDeleteSheesh, not surprised it was so easy for the Politicians to get away with all this with so much Context Distortion going on.
While the supposed Hollywood Propaganda Ministry couldn't seem to tell the Difference between Geronimo and Osama Bin Laden (ironic as the Latter was a Cold War Era Mercenary for the CIA in Afghanistan) American People were painfully aware of how they were perceived elsewhere in the World.
ReplyDelete"I didn't vote for him" they would say - meaning GWB - feeling somewhat awkward, others tried passing themselves off as Canadians. So it seemed that quintessentially American Institution of Hollywood was out of Step even with the People it proportedly represented.
And while Beavis the Film Boss, and Butthead the Producer disseminated the Weapons of Mass Ignorance what were they up to in other Countries if anyone dared to ask any Questions of their Excesses?
They still are!!!!
But while Micheal Moore asked Congress People if they were sending their Sons or Daughters to fight in Iraq, how many of those pro-Warrers here were queuing up to join the Territorial Army? If they were so 'for' the War why was it rumoured that Bush might have to introduce the Draft? That maybe Tony Blair might in Britain?
Must have been lovely in New Zealand as "Lord of the Rings" was hijacked and used as pro-War Propaganda but maybe Iraqis, Syrians and anyone else devastated by more than 10 years of Conflict should write to Peter Jackson asking him where exactly in the Ruins of Aleppo is the Idyl of the Shire? Anti-Slavery Campaigners should ask him to elaborate about comparing Faramirs Charge on the Pelanor to that of George Picket at Gettysburg? So what does that say about those they were charging at?
John Wilkes Booth the Actor would have had loads of Work in 21st Century Hollywood.
A pro-Slavery Secessionist who couldn't actually bring himself to join the Confederate Army.
ReplyDeleteHaving watched "Windtalkers" and "Flag of my Father's" several times I must say this ......
Ira Hayes wasn't the only Native American to serve in the Military, while WW2 wasn't the only Conflict they fought in. Many served in Korea, Vietnam and the first Gulf War. Many also did the recent Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. Wonder how they felt if they saw that Film, while how many Afro-American Servicemen might have whinced at being compared to the Orcs at Peter Jackson's Osgiliath!
And while Hollywood should apologize to Native America for lumping them in with Islamic Terrorist Mercenaries, Peter Jackson should to Afro-America for his diabolical Slight to what the Union Army fought for in the American Civil War (which defines what modern America is) Israel has yet to apologize to us for lumping us in with Hezbollah!
ReplyDeletehttps://metrowynn.blogspot.com/2016/11/arthur-balfour-to-king-arthur.html?m=1
So, of course should Stephen Spielberg and Tom Hanks for their Gaffe in "Band of Brothers".
https://metrowynn.blogspot.com/2016/11/arthur-balfour-to-king-arthur.html?m=1
What was so astonishing about "Axis of Evil" was the complete Refusal by GWBs Washington to acknowledge that there might be friendly Iranians. That every one of Iran's 80 Million People are Kalashnikov wielding Islamists with the Ayatollah etched into their very Souls.
ReplyDeleteHow it refused to acknowledge Ahmed Khatami's reforms and attempts to bring Iran into the 21st Century. Ironic as they were fully supported by a Secretary General of the same UN who issued Resolutions against Saddam during GWBs Father's Gulf War of 1990-1. Seems America had adopted a Pick-n-mix Attitude when it came to the UN by the time Bush Junior was in charge.
That this Attitude wasn't exclusively American or exclusively about Iran.
Seems Israel suffers the same erroneous Attitude as anyone who might even have the slightest friendly disposition to, or from, Iran outside it's Borders must obviously be Hezbollah. How insulting, how ignorant and how wide of the mark can they possibly be?
How insane too .....
Even the Lunatic Hitler acknowledged Friendlies in ethnic and ideologically opposed Regions like the Slavic East. Although the misguided Vlasovites, Don Cossacks and Nazi Ukrainians would ultimately have suffered the same Fate as all other Slavs in the Region, even Himmler met with these People. As we know the Reich still lost in their pursuit of Lebensraum, despite this.
So what chance would 8 Million Israelis have against 80 Million Iranians if there aren't any Friendlies at all? How long would it have been before Russia got involved, while Israel has isolated itself by lumping everyone else in with the likes of Hezbollah?
What happens afterwards if there were no Friendlies to negotiate an end to Hostilities, if indeed there was an Afterwards? Did Bush and Jerusalem suggest a complete Destruction of Iranians and any of the others they chose to lump in with them? Even Stalins Soviet Union had People like Walter Ulbricht they could install in post-War East Germany, the very People pledged to enslave and exterminate them. Thus the Conflict with Germany had ended.
As far as the American President was concerned in 2001-3 there were no Iranians this might be achieved with, while Israel's more recent Attitude extends to anyone else, even if it is established Fact that they by no means endorse the likes of Lebanon's "Party of God".
China and Iran ..... America seeths!
ReplyDeleteHate to say I told you so, and it seems People in America are finally realising the Damage done by America's Stance in Iran for the last 20 years. I refute Claims that this forced closer Relations between Beijing and Tehran, but it does show that this was another erroneous Zone in America's Intel In the Region. How it failed to spot the continuing and historical Relationship with China. Rather like being involved in Iraq meant a proverbial blind Spot in keeping Tabs on the Activities of the Beijing Government.
Before Arabia descended into Chaos and a miasma of Wars America seemed oblivious to its big Chance in healing the Rift with Tehran. How Ahmed Khatami could garner support from the UN via its Secretary General - Kofi Annan - but not from the American Government.
The last year of Bill Clinton and early years of GWB ought to have seized on it, not only to have ensured they aren't isolated by this latest Manouver, but also to put Pressure on Saddam Hussein. Saddam's stance with America was based largely on theirs with the Iranians, which said; they might not like me very much, but they like Iran even less. Thus, the Sunni Leader could kick back and relax despite his Countries Shia Majority. Not so if he saw Tehran working with, not against, Washington.
Much has been made of the recent Nuclear Treaty struck by Iran with former President Obama, and how a Biden Presidency could restore that. Writing as a Brit I have to say that we had our Treaty with Libya about Chemical Weapons amongst other things except America killed the Bloke in Tripoli that was with. Ironically, Tony Blair - who made that Deal - supports the Arab Spring that ousted him, citing majority Populations against minority Governments, except he seems blind sided by his Support of Mr "Axis of Evil".
So, while China and Tehran form an Alliance in the Region that has made America wince, Washington suffered a Problem with Iran just as inconsolable as Iran did with them during the Ayatollah Khomeini. Subsequently Iran not only has its Deal with China, but also has its Proxy's and Deployments in Arabia and the Levant.
Maybe Bush Junior ought to have consulted Bush Senior about how to deal with the UN. To his Credit Bush Senior did at least seek a UN Mandate for his War with Saddam (which he didn't over step), while negotiating with the old Cold War Enemy - the Soviet Union - to decide the future of post-Cold War Europe.
Another proverbial Pandora's Box as that Treaty (Conventional Forces in Europe), vis a vis NATO is also in Tatters!
Let's be more specific here too ....
ReplyDeleteIt was President Barack Obama and Joe Bidens America that killed Gaddafi and threw Libya into turmoil. The DoD Secretary? Hillary Rodham Clinton. So, Obama might have had his Treaty with Iran about Nuclear Proliferation that will probably never be used in War, while we had ours with Tripoli about Chemical Weapons, which Saddam didn't have in the 2000's - but which have been used many times in several Wars in his Absence.
While some American Journalists speculate that American Attitudes forced the current Agreement China has with Iran did they not consider that while America contrived to turn the Levant and North Africa into Warzones, told People to wash Coal and reduce Smog, inject Bleach to fight off Viruses and stutter over dealing with the Disease - plus everything else happening, including Hollywood Execs sexually assaulting their way through Los Angeles, the Chinese and Iranians just got on with running their Affairs irrespective of the Farce called America in the 21st Century?
ReplyDeleteAnd to illustrate this, China has spent the best part of a Month trying to tell the World about a new Pneumonic Virus, more deadly than the novel Corona Virus that is afflicting Countries like Kazakhstan.
Presumably - after President Trump has had his daily Fix of Bleach and washed the Coal - he might at least acknowledge it!
I like to think that George and Barbara sometimes told George and Laura off for some of the latters Botch-ups. That while the former sought a UN Resolution for his War with Saddam - and kept to it, there was no Resolution for the latters War of 2003. That while the former respected the UN's Decisions the latter ignored them. David Kelly came back from Iraq and told him and Blair Saddam had no WMD's. What happened to him I wonder?
ReplyDeleteThe latter also chose to ignore UN Support for the Reformist Government in Tehran of the early 2000's before "Axis of Evil".
That Bush Senior sat in his Den with his Son and bollocked him for screwing up the Treaty he had negotiated with Gorbachev, former Warsaw Pact and Soviets and NATO Countries, to end the Cold War and prevent the Fractiousness that now exists in the Region between NATO and the CIS.
While the West has been caught on the back Foot by the recent Deal China has made with Iran, it shows a dangerous Westerncentricism that assumes the whole World revolves around the North Atlantic. That nothing beyond that matters.
ReplyDeleteWhat will the World look like after the 25 years have elapsed? How diminished will the West be after China and Iran have consolidated this new Bloc? To supply China with Oil not only sidestepped Sanctions against Iran, it also obtains the Chinese Market. A mutual Trade Agreement with the 2 Countries denies access to a West that needs to be part of that Equation.
Now, both Iran and China can say to it "impose all the Sanctions you want, now it is you that doesn't matter!"
Joe Biden can try and resuscitate the Nuclear Treaty with Tehran, and Iranian Diplomats might support this on US Media News Shows, but as the Deal takes Shape - and US-Iran Hostilities have grown any American Influence has diminished!
In the end, what can any US President offer Iran that they now don't have? They have someone they can sell Oil to while being supplied with all the spare Parts and latest Technologies they need!
ReplyDeleteI also like to think that any of those who negotiated the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty gave George Robertson a bollocking for failing to convince Mikhail Sakasvilli of his Error of Judgement. Before the War in Georgia there was Scope for further Negotiations with Moscow - but after it, and Events in the Ukraine (which is where the Georgian President now serves in Government) that became increasingly difficult.
ReplyDeleteThat whole Region ought to be neutral according to the Treaty and while Moscow has kept to its Borders NATO now goes right up to the Baltic States. When they draughted it they must have been mindful of Stalin's very real Fears of yet another German Expansion into the East, except this time it is NATO doing it. This was how the Cold War started - as Soviet Forces occupied eastern Europe for 40 years as a Buffer against that Expansion.
And the deteriorating Relations with Russia meant the West via NATO, and America, forfeit valuable Leverage with Tehran.
ReplyDeleteThe increasing Number of Sanctions against Iran has made it almost impossible for other western Countries to deal with it. European Companies have even been fined by America for doing so.
Even western Proxies in the Pacific Rim are compromised. What if China decided to foreclose on any Debt Australia has with them fur example? Beijing has the majority Share of Tasmania, while there is the small Matter of Port Darwin. Australia might attempt to nationalise the Port, thus removing it from Chinese ownership but Beijing can apply Pressure elsewhere in the Country. Even Australian Politicians admit just how screwed by all this they are!
This is worse than the Cold War.
ReplyDeleteThe Cold War that ended in 1989 was a military and ideological one. Capitalism believed it could win as the expansion of Neoliberalism meant People living in it could be rich, the free Market was all - and it encouraged an enterprising Spirit (at least, that's how it was sold). Communism hoped rather naively that "the People" would forsake Greed and selfishness, and would clamour for everyone to become equal. The Countries representing each had their Military to protect and occasionally impose it.
The West also knew that it could bankrupt Communism by forcing the latter to spend increasingly on Defence, and this is what it did. What was available to it, but not Communism was a System of Credit to borrow from to pay for it. At the end Communism was broke, but the West had huge Debts.
This time, there is no Ideology behind it. Russia and Iran are capitalist Countries, while China is only nominally Communist. Thus, it would be very difficult to force an Arm's Race on them to bankrupt them like the Cold War did. China has kept up with, and overtaken America and their Allies in the Pacific with Shipbuilding and an Airforce, showing no Symptoms of financial Hardship.
Ironically, the Regime of Sanctions against Iran, and now, by proxy, China, is America building it's 'Berlin Wall' or 'Iron Curtain' keeping its own, and other People, in, and apart from the other side in the Equation.
Walter Ulbricht built his Wall to keep People in and that is what America is doing. They even fined BNP Parisbas, the French national Bank for dealing with Iran. This makes it impossible for other Countries to negotiate anything with the Iranians. The Law they use isn't something draughted by any international Body like the UN or the World Bank, not even the Security Council. It is Law created in the US Congress and thus unilaterally American.
ReplyDeleteIt's rather like the difference between the Gulf War of 1990-1 which was backed by Security Council Resolutions, and GWBs "Coalition of the Willing" and War of 2003, which wasn't.
It shows what America is in danger of becoming and does nothing to ingratiate it to the rest of the World that might start seeing it as a Liability. When they fined the French France would have been within their Rights to have said "you might have Issues with Iran, but don't expect everyone else to!"
In some ways they're starting to act like the Soviets did in 1968 with Czechoslovakia. The Fear in Moscow was that Dubcek might start to side with the West, but what the Prague Spring did was provide a Glimmer of Hope that the Cold War might have ended as long ago as then. That it was possible for Socialist eastern Europe to coexist. Brezhnev's Government wasn't having any of it and he and other - compliant -Warsaw Pact Countries invaded.
What is particularly ironic about the Levant and Arabia is how 2 of Sykes-Picots biggest Guarantors were Saddam Hussein and the Assad Governments in Syria.
ReplyDeleteWhile a War deposed one, an Insurgency has severely compromised the other. While Saddam had his Issues with the Kurds, Assad supported them, while there were tacit Alliances, and this has since been consolidated as the Syrian Army were deployed in Kurdish Regions against any Invasion from Turkey who regard Kurds as "Terrorists"!
Rojavan Politician Hediya Yousef called for a multi-ethnic Federal System of Government - and would mean a regional Government for Kurds, which is an entity working within the sovereign State of Syria.
Syrian deployment in the region was meant to replace American Forces who were withdrawn by President Trump, who the Kurds felt had betrayed them by doing so. So the whole Syrian Gambit is starting to look like yet another counter-productive War in the Region which will consolidate Assad's position and maybe even boost his Popularity.
How much of what Trump has to say about it is genuine Policy and how much is Popularism is up to the Audience, but here were his Comments on it ......
Trump, in a tweet, said: "Very smart not to be involved in the intense fighting along the Turkish Border, for a change. Those that mistakenly got us into the Middle East Wars are still pushing to fight. They have no idea what a bad decision they have made."
For once I agree with him.
Then there was the Demise of one of our potential Guarantors in North Africa ...
What you have to remember about Trump's Comments (real or hyped) about the Iraq War in the Preamble, it's duration and its aftermath, is how they are all subjectively Americanised. Not once does he refer to the UN Resolution 1441 which compelled Saddam to dispose of any WMDs, which he appears to have done, confirmed by Inspectors like David Kelly and Troops during the Invasion, or how, according to the UN Charter Kofi Annan cites, the War was illegal. Considering Donald Trump was running for one of the most powerful executive Offices in the World, with Launch Codes and a huge Military that has been used elsewhere this was amiss!
ReplyDeleteFrom Korea to the first Gulf War (both with UN Mandates) America provided the largest Contingent. The Fact Trump has never mentioned the UN in his Comments, for or against, shows the Shift in Emphasis in US Foreign Policy and Attitudes since 1990.
ReplyDeleteAnd it isn't just President Trump. Former President Obama also seemed indicative of this Attitude. Here's what Lech Walesa had to say about his impression of the former American Leader .....
ReplyDelete"When he was elected there was great hope in the world. We were hoping that Obama would reclaim moral leadership for America, but that failed ... in terms of politics and morality America no longer leads the world".
And if America has forfeit its position as a moral and political Leader, Britains moral Authority is compromised by default and Israel's moral Authorities have since died Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin can say to whoever is in Washington, London and Jerusalem "who are you to tell us how to do things?"
ReplyDeleteAmerica today isn't the same America that fought the Chinese in Korea, and it isn't the same America that broadcast into Poland during the Cold War and inspired People like Walesa and Havel. The so called "Coalition of the Willing" in 2003 was a hotch potch of Countries bribed and blackmailed into a War, not the Coalition of 1990 with a UN Mandate.
It's like the 20th Century only had 91 years, with all its Ills ending in 1991. After that it all started to disintegrate like there was a 9 year Gap ending with a 21st Century and 3rd Millennium CE that has been dismal. Most of that can be attributed to those 9 years.
Both Bush Senior and Mikhail Gorbachev would have commented on Iraq - mentioning the UN, Mandates and Resolutions. Bush Junior ignored all that completely and that shows just how potently disastrous the 90's were that that Wisdom was never passed to the next Generation.
Portishead the Town is a post 90's Theme Park, with a 90's Soundtrack. What's with the Steroid People if this millennial Apex is supposed to be peaceful? People I meet, now 40 - 50 something's, seem dirty and sleazy!
ReplyDeleteWhat Walesa says ought to be taken very seriously as someone who was in the forefront of what happened at the end of the Cold War. Feted by everyone as Solidarnosc Leader and seen as the Man who brought down Jarulzelski, he can comment on what he knew in his dealings with the West, and America specifically. Vaclav Havel might have had similar things to say!
ReplyDeleteThe horrible thing is the America Lech Walesa refers to no longer exists, but as things deteriorate and the Bamboo Curtain goes up its the America the World needs.
ReplyDeleteIt's a sad indictment on recent Politicians that Richard Nixon knew how to handle the Chinese better than they seem to, and he was embroiled in a War in South East Asia.
ReplyDeletePoliticians now can indulge in whatever Celebrity driven Stage Management and Grandstanding they like but where was the Irony when Walesa became Poland's first democratically elected President?
Kylie and Thom can make as many Records they like but there must have been a Culture of Corruption in Extremis for Australia's Politicians and others responsible to sell off huge Chunks of its Land and Economy.
Imagine the Furore if someone sold Portbury Dock to Toyota or Mitsubishi!
The 2 huge Mistakes made by America were....
ReplyDelete1) It's failure to tackle Al Qaida in the 1990's. The Terrorists had rampaged through the Decade with bombings in Yemen, the World Trade Center, Embassy's in Nairobi and Dar El Salaam, and a US Warship - killing 250 and injuring 7000. Just how much did they have to do BEFORE 9/11 so Bill Clinton would do anything?
2)The other was their Failure to work with the post-Ayatollah Governments of Iran in their Attempts at moderation.
The Deal they have with China has yielded a brutal and bitter Paradox.
Iran, severely afflicted by the Covid19 Virus and whose Economy went into Freefall after increased US Sanctions has surrendered some of its Sovereignty becoming a Client of China, which goes against the Principles of the 1979 Revolution.
The thing is, it's China that benefits in the 21st Century, not America in the 1990's!
And People might think China is authoritarian now. President Nixon's negotiations with Mao in 1972 were with a hardcore Communist China long before any Reforms or attempts at Capitalism. He figured ways the Fount of free market Economics could work with a Country that had recently gone through the Cultural Revolution. Not only that, and the War raging in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, he helped broker a Peace between Beijing and the Soviets by offering Moscow similar.
ReplyDeleteAnd while the Chinese own the Lease on Port Darwin, Australia it seems they also paid off someone in Israel to manage the Harbour at Haifa. A Port the American 6th Fleet often use as they patrol the Mediterranean.
ReplyDeleteDidn't they learn anything from Munich 1938?
ReplyDeleteThe Czechoslovak Army was big, powerful and modern, and Adolf Hitler was cautious about going to War with them. The main Defences against German Invasion were in the Sudenten. These were effectively neutralised with the Munich Agreement and Czechoslovakia was left prostrate to Invasion. This was made easier when Slovakia was made a Protectorate of the Reich.
Being able to read Subtext; it seems those Armchair Generals (at best), at worst, the sort of People who do it for its own sake, are at it again.
ReplyDeleteAstonishing after 18 years that they still are, but now they're using the Albright and Wilson Story as a Juxtaposition against anyone who opposed the Iraq War of 2003.
A Subtext that seems to include "Run to the Hills" by Iron Maiden - except their hiding behind Women and Children smacks of the same Saddam Hussein with his "Human Shield" in 1990 that their War was aimed at destroying in 2003. Pictures of the Iraqi Leader surrounded by 100s of foreign Nationals, many of whom Women and Children, were shown everywhere in the pre-amble to "Dessert Storm". Saddam Hussein, who had invaded Kuwait and brutalised the Kuwaiti People (Soldiers even killed the Animals at the Countries Zoo). The War to eject him had its supporters, and those who opposed it.
I was one of the former, believing Saddam had gone too far and his Invasion was illegal. Even the Soviet Union and Syria's Hafez Al Assad supported UN Resolutions against him, Iraqi Pilots defected to the old Enemy Iran rather than fight the Coalition.
The more recent Iraq War was very different, and sold on a very shaky Premise. We were told about those WMD's, how Al Qaida used Iraq as a Base and how he supported them. It turned out he had no WMDs by then, while he was very anti Bin Laden. So, incidentally, was Ghadafy in Libya.
This time there was no Mandate for War in Iraq, scant Probable Cause and certainly nothing like there was in 1990.
The Subtext continues .....
They use the Pollution caused by the Import and Processing of Phosphorus.
Very true that Phosphorus is highly toxic and volatile. But then so were the Weapons certain Americans sold Saddam in the 1980's. The Film "Gulf War" shows you this, and also the extent Contamination afflicted Military and Civilian Personnel who had contracted Gulf War Syndrome. This isn't Pollution though apparently.
If those pro-2003 Warrers get on their Soap Boxes about all that, focussing on how the Albright's were "War Dodgers", I might find those Video Clips of Saddam hiding behind that Human Shield. Like they are now!
I've always thought if they were so pro-War in 2003 Iraq why didn't they join the Territorial Army so they might engage in active Service there should they be required to? Better than lounging around twee little Towns 1000's of Miles away from any Conflict.
One thing their Attitude showed was how things had changed for the worst in the 1990's. At the start of them you could be as anti-War as you like, it never affected any Aspect of your Life, even if that War was legal, at the end of them you couldn't, even if it wasn't.
As for Songs about the Plight of Native Americans how many of them had Parents who suffered the Welsh Slap for speaking their native Language?
It seems the British Government are shocked at how the Taliban have successfully retaken Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteDominic Raab and Boris Johnson have Tony Blair and George Bush to thank for that because the former PM and President deployed nearly 140,000 so called "Coalition of the Willing" Troops in Iraq rather than send them to Afghanistan. The Collapse of Saddam caused the rise of Isil and other Islamic Extremists, which then also had to be dealt with, while concurrently having to confront similar in Syria. The latter because of an attempt to oust the Bashir Assad Government.
While all this went on the subsequently severely reduced Forces in Afghanistan couldn't fight conclusively as they were deployed piecemeal. Thus, the Taliban were never completely defeated and just bided their Time. Had the Coalition not been divided and some sent elsewhere the Taliban wouldn't have been as effective as they have just shown they are.
I hate to say I told you so, but I and many others have been telling you so since about 2003!
And it isn't just Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteWhile Kabul 2021 starts resembling Saigon in 1975 other Areas have seen escalations in Conflict.
The US couldn't maintain an indefinite Presence everywhere and as they gradually withdraw the perceived Weakness has been exploited by regional Powers.
But how much of this can be traced back to Gaffes and Mistakes made nearly 20 years ago?
Iran has been cited as the main Threat in the Region but up until the election of former Revolutionary Guard Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Iran was run by Reformist Mohammed Khatami. He even elicited the Support of former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan with his "Dialogue among Civilisations" Speech and Aid to Afghanistan to counter Al Qaida before the War of the 2000's.
Then George Bush arrived.
Lumping Khatami's Iran in with "Axis of Evil" and making the latters position less effective politically at home and influentially abroad the Reforms ground to a halt and he was defeated in 2005 by the hard-line conservative. The current President is just Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in continu'um.
Things didn't improve as America changed Hands in 2009. Obama's Foreign Secretary Hillary Clinton seemed poised for War with Iran and Iran continued with its nuclearisation Program and antagonism to the West.
The first People to get it in the Neck when this happens are exactly those who have in recent days. An Environment Activist and an Iranian-Kurd Politician have been tortured and killed in Iraq - while other Dissidents are facing further Repression.
Hezbollah are resuming their Activities in southern Lebanon like that Country hasn't suffered enough while Tussles in the Golan Heights Region of Syria has resonances of 1967 and 1973, except Israel no longer has the Veterans of 1948 in charge or the deft Political Nous of the venerated Yitzhak Rabin.
Now Sunni Saddam has gone how long will it be before predominantly Shi'ite Iraq goes the same way as Afghanistan and Baghdad fills up with Refugees like Scenes from Vietnam? Vietnamisation was applied to Iraq as Iraqis were trained and equipped by Coalition Forces to gradually replace them. In recent years we saw Afghani equivalents turn on their Sponsors so how long can the West rely on their Iraqi Protégés?
Terrible Errors have been made throughout most of the 21st Century and what is happening now is the Effect of those particular Causes!
And having just read an Article by former Bush Aide, David Frumm it seems there's still a lingering erroneusness in some Political Circles in Washington.
ReplyDeleteHe writes about Trump's provocation of Iran, creating the Impression that the former President was exclusive in his Sabre Rattling to Tehran. He forgets why he became President at all.
The other Candidate in 2016 had spent her time creating a Trail of Dead and poked Eyes from Haiti to Libya, Tehran to Moscow, and many still believe she would have been a War President from day one. The Americans had become war weary like they had by 1968 and certainly the early 70's and sceptical of the Republican Establishment that forwarded Geb Bush as it's Nominee. They were dismayed at the Democrat Alternative that merely said "More of the same" and thus the Landscape was right for someone who at least seemed like an Alternative to THE Alternative.
If Mr Frumm - who probably still believes the Hype about WMDs even after his own Troops didn't find any - thinks Trump was worse then America still has a long Journey before the Damage started in 2002 can be repaired.
I'm not saying "the Donald" had all the Answers. After all, how many of us greeted Tony Blair's 1997 Election Victory with relief after 18 years of the Tories now it transpires he didn't? But it was up to the Democrats to field a better Candidate and the Republicans a better Nominee that didn't look like GWB in continu'um!
How the Taliban seized the Capital so easily - with very few Shots being fired and scant resistance from the afghanicised Clients - shows how superficial and unreliable any Loyalty might have been for the Protege State.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't just how they are now the Government, it's also the years of Wrangling, Jostling, Spin, huge loss of Life, disruption and displacement for Millions more, vast amounts of Money spent, destruction on a huge Scale, and the polarization of our own Societies (of those for, and those against), looks like it was all for nothing. The Taliban resumed Power like it never happened.
Back in early 21st Century Iran Khatami's Reforms and subsequent Government didn't stand a chance once they had been tarred by Bush's "Axis of Evil" Brush. "You're either with us, or the Terrorists" he kept telling the World - making any Country wanting to reopen their Embassy in Iran for the first time in 20 years reluctant to do so. Thus, a large Chunk of Khatami's Policy was destroyed.
Cruelly ironic is how he might have been the Key to either deposing or reforming Saddam. One thing Saddam could rely on as he kicked back in Baghdad was how some of the West hated the Iranians more than they did him. This goes back to events in 1979 when the Shah was deposed and Khomeini came back from Paris. The West ploughed Millions into Saddam as he fought Tehran in the War of the 1980's.
But what if the West began cultivating Relations with the old Enemy? What if Khatami's Government rejoined the Community of Nations? Saddam's predominantly Shia Population sees what is happening and realise they really aren't alone anymore. How this further isolates his Government surrounded by increasingly encouraged Shia Moslems.
He could either implode and collapse or start attempting a diplomatic Offensive to appear more compliant. The end of the Cold War, which saw Islamist Kidnappers and Militant Groups in Lebanon begin to realise the Game was up, began releasing the remaining Hostages they had had since the early-mid 1980's. They had lost all their Sponsors. If all this could affect them why couldn't it have affected him? He had far more to lose than they did, including the Support of his own People.
And even with him gone, if it's true that some Intel People wanted to keep his Army intact to run the post-War Country then this proves that Ba'athists could be compliant in the right circumstances. Maybe even Saddam.
ReplyDeleteThere is a Precedent ...
To prevent South East Asia from descending into Chaos after the Japanese surrender Louis Mountbatten used the intact post-War Japanese Army as an interim Force until the Region could be rehabilitated.
Recommended Viewing "The Killing Fields".
ReplyDeleteNot sure things in Kabul will be quite as extreme as they were in Phnom Penh in 1975 but there are similarities, both with the Khymer Rouge and the Taliban, and with what is happening as Westerners are evacuated with Afghani Colleagues and Associates.
David Putnam's Film graphically shows how quickly a Country can collapse, and while something similar happened in Vietnam at least the post-War Vietnamese encouraged People to visit their Country. Very few People did Taliban Afghanistan in the 90's and no-one visited the K.R run Kampuchia/Cambodia.
Taliban Cadres are doing House to House Searches for People who worked with the Karzai Government. Not made any more difficult by how quickly they seized the Documentation Process. Taliban Officials now check ID, Passports and all other Documents which means they very rapidly know who and where everyone is.
ReplyDeleteThis is before the West has fully withdrawn and while there is still some Media Presence in the Country. What happens once both are gone could be terrible. After nearly 18 years many worked for the former Government, others the Institutions while many more had Business linked to it all.
The big disadvantage those coordinating the evacuation has is the lack of a Seaport. They have to rely on Kabul Airport and are at the Mercy of Taliban Officials and the use of Afghan Airspace.
Tony Blair, it seems, is suffering from a convenient form of Amnesia. While saying the US and British Armies ought to have stayed in Afghanistan "to see it through" even as long ago as 2017 about half the Afghani Population lived in Areas run by the Taliban - or at least where they operated.
ReplyDeleteEven in Areas where they weren't the dominant Power they still mounted Attacks and Insurgency. This suggests there were never enough Coalition Soldiers in the Country to fight this, to see it through or not. It's also all very well for a former Prime Minister to say that, not so much for the Families of those Troops who were continually deployed piecemeal so they couldn't effect a decisive Campaign. It becomes increasingly indefensible to keep Soldiers in the Field in a War that never seems to end. Lyndon Johnson must have known this by 1968 when he refused nomination for the Presidential Election that year. Vietnam had only gone on for 2.5 years by then, but DoD Secretary Robert McNamara was seeing the Cracks in the Policy and Johnson was slowly realising it.
Maybe if Ewan Blair had joined the Territorials as a Reservist his Father's Comments might seem more justifiable, but he didn't! It was the same for all the Armchair Generals I kept meeting, all gung ho and pro-War - many under 50, most of whom eligible to join the TA and put their Money where their Mouths were.
On the Subject of "The Killing Fields" our Man of Harlech went to Cambodia/Kampuchea in 1967 with Kennedy's Widow - Jackie - to meet Prince Sihanouk. The Idea was to establish an Agreement that no US Forces would encroach into his Country and destabilise his Government.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately this didn't last into the Nixon Presidency - whose Rolling Thunder was systematically bombing into Cambodia and ground Troops fought into it against VC and NVA Soldiers using it as part of the Hi Chi Minh Trail. It was the same with Laos and the whole Region collapsed by 1975 - ironically caused by the very Forces sent there to prevent it.
They're going to be making a Film about all that, except I don't know why they're getting Guy Pearce to play Harlech. I'd have thought Ioan Gryffudd might have been more appropriate!
ReplyDeleteBack in Afghanistan, by defeating the Afghan Army the Taliban captured their Equipment in a Swoop that lasted less than a Fortnight. Some of that will be the latest Surface to Air Anti-Aircraft Missiles. They are in a position where they can blackmail every Plane that flies out of the Country. Anyone fleeing Afghanistan will have a nerve wracking Flight while in Afghan Airspace.
ReplyDeleteThe Army might have been wisely deployed protecting Areas around key Border Crossings, particularly with Pakistan whose UN Contingent could escort Refugee Columns to Seaports for evacuation by Ship.
If People ask me whether I was pro-Iran I would reply that I was pro the Iran that ought to have been, not the Hornets Nest of Reactionaries that are the inevitable Response to a Ham fisted blundering President and his erroneous Speech Writers!
ReplyDeleteIran was not going to become a Social Democracy overnight, but what Progress had been made was very rapidly undone by a GWB that invoked a Response that caused it to throw back to a time when it's President was one of the Hostage Takers of 1979.
I've become a bit wary of People who claim to have been on anti-War Marches if they seem to conform to the Game of Juxtaposition Agenda. They'd just as soon go on a pro-War Demo for the same Reason.
ReplyDeleteAlso, if that Stuff was genuine why didn't it work?
It's like those People in 1968 in Chicago, whose Activities indirectly made Richard Nixon President, whose Policy in Cambodia invoked the Rise of the Khymer Rouge. Prince Sihanouk pleaded with America and the UN to cease Activities in eastern Cambodia which gradually destabilised his Government, helped invoke the Coup of 1970 and the Civil War. Ironically it was the Vietnamese Army that ended Pol Pots Regime.
As for the "Killing Fields" there are some weird Reviews of it, while I didn't expect "Apocalypse Now ll" or another "Platoon". It was the Story of 2 Journalists - one who escaped the Tragedy, the other who got caught up in and disappeared in it. Very conducive to the Hostage Project a few years later, particularly as it's Soundtrack Writer gave us the Song "Hostage".
Far from being "boring" it's a brilliant portrayal of that Story, set against the similarly shown Backdrop of
the terrible Events that happened.
To understand this of recent years you have to revisit Stuff from not so recent. The thing is, the Dinner Party Club, that might as well have convened in the 70's have set out to corrupt and distort much of this. They either try and assume the Credit, or pretend none of it ever happened, at least not if they weren't involved.
ReplyDeleteFrom Chicago to the Killing Fields ....
ReplyDeleteHippies might think they stopped a War, but they stopped nothing.
1968, and the usual Suspects descended on the Illinois City as the Democrats held their Conference. Bobby was gone, killed in California, Eugene McCarthy graciously bowed out of the Contest in Respect for Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson announced he wasn't seeking re-election or selection as a Candidate.
Hubert Humphrey became the Defacto Candidate against the Republican, former VP Richard Nixon. Humphrey might have inherited some of Kennedy and McCarthys anti-War Sentiments - and was poised to be a Withdrawist President, but Fate was being decided on the Streets, not the Conference Hall. The Usual Suspects, resorting to the usual Tactics rampaged and Democrat Mayor Daley's Police responded with what many have called a Police Riot.
Voter's saw all this on TV - so did Richard Nixon - and who might they elect as the next President as the Democrats beat each other up inside and outside the Conference?
History tells us what happened, and while Hubert Humphrey became an also-ran Footnote in History Nixon became infamous as the War in Cambodia Watergate President. Thus, the Activities of the Yippies indirectly facilitated the Rise of the Khymer Rouge and Murder of Millions of People.
They killed the real Peace and gave us that Drugs and Costume Party instead!
A few years earlier and the World looked set to be incinerated in thermo-nuclear War. A President and his Brother were in Washington, being pressured to invoke another Bay of Pigs Fiasco by hawkish Military Advisors, except they didn't. Those 13 Days that could have ended everything were finally decided when Bobby Kennedy met Anatoly Dobrinin and they didn't.
A lot of this was influenced by when 2 Men were at College with each other, and Jack was being inspired by fellow Alumni David. David's Father wasn't an Appeaser about Munich 1938 and resigned after Chamberlain's ridiculous "Piece of Paper". Kennedy's own Father unfortunately misjudged Hitler and Mussolini - thus, Ormsby-Gores Conversations with the Future President probably steered him in a different Direction. Kennedy didn't back down during the Missile Crisis, or cede Territory to Krushchev - but he didn't expect Moscow to either.
The Hippies did a lot of Damage there too....
While David Ormsby-Gores Influence informed the Kennedy Presidency, and he even went to Cambodia to negotiate an end to the Vietnam War with Jack's Widow, his Children - who had become part of that Hippie Elite - weren't quite as successful. One shot himself, another suffered the Ravages of a Heroin given her by her weepy Guitarist Fiance and Francis struggled desperately to keep the Family afloat until he died a few years ago.
There are quite a few Myths about how any if that Hippie Crap actually achieved anything, while all it took was a change in late 60's Fashion to render it all obsolete anyway. It takes more than an Eric and Alice Photo, sat on Steps doing those disingenuous Peace Signs to stop a War, while - as Robert Kennedy deliberately avoided the trendy 60's Areas when he found an America broke and broken - it showed just whose America the so-called Hippies really represented. The 90's British equivalent was a Replay of some of this, the Center of Gravity being Camden rather than Carnaby, while Trip Hop Ville only applied to those in the Peckerhead Dinner Party Club.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, back in Iran, when someone like the UN Secretary General endorses the Work of a national Leader that's as good as having a UN Mandate. As Mr Khatami discovered, and the rest of the World gradually learned, it's a shame they don't offer the same sort of Political and fiscal Support they might other Mandates, and even those Resolutions that might seem a bit murky. Nothing like the amount of Support was given him as was the subsequent Iraq War.
ReplyDeleteI write from experience, having seen how the 90's started, but then how it turned into the Decade of the Doushbag. Shame the same Support wasn't given us as was the Scum and Villainy that thrived in the Decade that was the Pre-Amble to many other Betrayals.
When People watch Micheal Moore Documentaries where he shows you Areas of Flint, Michigan suffering chronic deprivation, Robert Kennedy did all that in 1968.
ReplyDeleteHe deliberately went into similar Areas in America's Rust-Belt Communities, knowing the TV Cameras would go with him. Instead of fashionable San Francisco, Sunset Boulevard, Venice Beach and Greenwich Village - which had been shown many times before - you see Areas that very rarely appear anywhere, but had been devastated first by Poverty, and then the Vietnam War. Lyndon Johnsons "Great Society" Budget was being spent on a War that cost America's annual Social spending every 2 Weeks. A million Miles away from all that "In a gadda da Vida", and in the Case of the Styvesant District of New York, only a Walk away from the Village, Wall Street and Park Avenue.
Why, oh why don't they ever give these things the Support they should have, like why wasn't there the same Enthusiasm to support Mr Khatami as there was the War in Iraq?
30 years ago there was a Project that defined the Zeitgeist - in the spirit of everything that was right - but it was very similar. Lots of Support for Stuff that might not have been - and the Effects of all that are now self evident.
One of the biggest Dilemmas recent Events in Afghanistan has proved, and those in Iraq inferred, wil be a Feeling amongst even potential Supporters in the Region is how any Westernisation is more trouble than it's worth. As any established in the Country once the Karzai Government took control is dismantled by the Taliban People will start to ask why they even bothered.
ReplyDeleteAnd while that starts sinking in many will remember the bitter Civil War of the early 90's and how the Taliban brought stability to the Country. Unfortunately it was their Brand of Stability - which meant a particularly brutal form of Theocratic Oppression.
Then there was a Phenomenon in Iraq where, after seeing Society collapse, Infrastructure dismantled and looted, and a huge increase in Violence People became nostalgic for the Saddam Era. He might have been a Tyrant, but at least the Health System worked and you didn't get shot in the Street.
What this means is the recent Misadventures in the Region could lead to a deeper entrenchment of Traditionalism and Nationalism. In other Words, everything that existed before the first Coalition Soldiers arrived.
Rather like non-existent Al Qaida Elements in Saddam's Iraq were very much in existence after it! What this could mean for their resurgence in Afghanistan will only be answered in the Months ahead as the Taliban deepen their Control.
History repeating ......?
ReplyDeleteWhile Soviet Soldiers and Politicians began describing the Afghan-Soviet War as Moscow's Vietnam - even while they were still fighting it - many have asked why the US seemed to have suffered an Amnesia about the War in Indochina and how it relates to their Experiences in Afghanistan.
The CBS Documentary Series about Vietnam, presented by Walter Cronkite revisits in the 1980's some of the People they interviewed during the War as long ago as Christmas 1965. One former GI is exasperated and says retrospectively how that Effort and Sacrifice was all for nothing.
There are very recent, rather harrowing Reports that some British Soldiers have committed Suicide after the Taliban recaptured Afghanistan so easily and so quickly. Rather like the ease the North Vietnamese marched into and defeated South Vietnam in a Fortnight. That maybe they feel like their Fight was all for nothing, while if you went there in 2001-2 that's the equivalent of being sent to Vietnam in 1965 as seen in 1985 when the CBS Program was made.
I hope that Friends and Family of Veterans on either side of the Atlantic who fought in Afghanistan and Iraq during the last 20 years emphasise that it wasn't their Fault. Whether it was being sent there at all, or the terrible Circumstances and incompetence that surrounded any of it, the Responsibility for all that lay elsewhere. That they did everything they could while they were there.
It isn't just the Service Men and Women either. Many Civilians have felt how their moral Authority has been compromised by it all. I've mentioned several times through this how that was one of the first Casualties of this Debacle, and how as long ago as 2005 Americans were trying to pass themselves off as Canadians or saying "I didn't vote for him" (GWB). Both of which told you how they felt the War was compromising them in World Opinion.
That is what is tragically happening to some of those who went, how about those who didn't?
ReplyDeleteFor nearly 18 years I kept meeting pro-Iraq Warrers, while there were others whose Support might have been a bit less direct. Sprawling about in the fashionable Idyl of Portishead, 1000s of Miles away from any Conflict, obviously part of the public Propagandist effort, criticising People who might not have supported it.
The Americans had 500,000 Troops in Vietnam and many 100,000s of 1000 in support at Sea, in Thailand and various other Places. The total Presence in Iraq never exceeded 125,000. Then there were Rumours of a Draught. People started getting nervous, but why?
After all, there were so many who were for the War and had the eligibility Criteria, who could have joined the Territorial Army as Reservists, waiting to answer the Call of Duty. We wouldn't have needed a Draught with so many of them. Except they didn't!
There was a historical Precedent for those sort of People.
His Name was John Wilkes-Booth who was vehemently pro-Slavery, pro-Seccesionist, but couldn't actually bring himself to join the Confederate Army. He has gone down in History as one of the most cowardly Doushbags of all time, who shot President Abraham Lincoln.
The recent Collapse in Afghanistan has yielded a very surreal Atmosphere on the Internet.
ReplyDeleteI've just read something about how the Military can't be used to impose a Civil Transformation in a Country from external Forces. In it there was no mention of how quickly the Roman Empire went back to being its constituent Parts once the Legions withdrew. The Holy Roman Empire after it disintegrated against the Norse Onslaught. How the Communist Governments of eastern Europe were swept away weeks after the Soviet Army withdrew, and then how the Union itself splintered soon after. There was also no mention of how Countries like Afghanistan and Iraq have no background of liberal Democracy, thus no one indigenous who could apply it without the huge and expensive Support of the West. Or that once any of these have happened their superficiality becomes apparent.
How not everyone West of Borodino speaks French after Napoleon's Rout, or German and Richard Wagner didn't replace Slavic Languages and Music east of Berlin after 1945.
There was also no mention about how that Fracturedness started at home. How divided the West was up to and including 9/11. How the Consensus of the end of the 1980's, based on a higher moral Authority, had dissolved in the Cynicism of the 90's.
Against that Background how on earth were we going to apply (or should that be impose) anything similar anywhere else?
The Gulf War of 1990-91 could legitimately be sold on a World War 2 Basis. Hitler had invaded Poland, Saddam had invaded Kuwait - and the similarities were there for all to behold. Thus, that particular "Coalition of the Willing" had its Precedent in SHAEF, while there were some involved who were active during WW2. They knew what they fought for then, they knew what they fought for 30 years ago, and a similar Consensus existed amongst the Masses.
With all that gone the Politicians resorted to Clichés. "Weapons of mass Destruction" became as much of a Cliche to Westerners as "Mother of all Battles" must have been to Iraqis. They resorted to Coercion and other Means, while considering what sort of Societies we had in the West by the end of the 90's what exactly were we exporting anyway?
All of this had a Precedent going back even further than Rome, and involved the same Regions. When Alexander's Macedonian Army marched through Phoenicea, Assyria, Babylon Messopotamia, Persia and Hindu Kush who'd have thought it'd all be gone within a few years of his Death?
Visit Skopje today and it's hard to believe that they once literally ruled the World!
The ridiculous Notion that these Countries would become instant liberal Democracies is fallacious.
ReplyDeleteOurs has developed over 1200 years, starting with things like the Cfraith Hywell and Magna Carta, continuing with William Wilberforce and the Pankhursts, while others have had their constitutional Evolutions.
America started with the Framers of the 1770's - continued with Emancipation during the Civil War - but was still a Work in progress right up to the Civil Rights Act of the 1960's - 200 years in the making. Even the Soviet Union warned the Communists in 1970's Afghanistan that their Reforms were happening far too quickly, while Moscow had been developing Communism for 60 years. China's current Affluence took 40 years - starting with Deng Xiaoping - and some of its gradual Reforms are what the Tiannenmen Square Protesters wanted in 1989..... ironically.
So even totalitarian Systems don't happen over night and take years to establish.
Romania after the Caeucescu's had former Communists in charge like Ion Illiescu because no-one else knew how to run the Country, while Boris Yeltsin was the Communist President of the Russian Republic before becoming its first nominally democratic Leader.
Assad's Syria formed part of the Coalition against Terrorism in its War with Al Qaida, running Detention Centers for Terrorist Suspects. How the West acted towards Damascus after 2011 seemed at odds with its declared War, and demonstrated another Agenda behind WoT. That Questions being asked about supposed Democratisation in the Region could be extended to the West's Commitment to tackle Terrorism at all.
ReplyDeleteNot only did it seem inconsistent to wage War on a Country that had aligned itself with the WoT, it was also inconsistent to support actual Terrorists in the Region after Ahmed Karzai had assumed power in Kabul.
I'm astonished at how the mainstream Media didn't pitch the Story anything like this so their Audiences could decide for themselves. We are a Democracy after all!
And that would probably be the Question that would get me fired from every Network in the Ether.....
ReplyDeleteSyria's alignment with the War on Terrorism did not remove them from the Crosshairs of Washington's Foreign Policy. That there was an open Bracket that included them, Libya and Yemen in the "Axis of Evil" after the GWB Presidency that went beyond Terrorism and pro-Democracy.
There were other Anomalies too ...... like the so-called "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine - which, combined with the "Arab Spring" tried comparing it all with 1989.
It was nothing like 1989, except the nicely cultivated, dumbed down Mediocracy of the 90's couldn't tell the difference.
The politically dubious Players in Kiev shouldn't be compared to People like Vaclav Havel or Lech Walesa. You wouldn't find Members of the Havel or Walesa Families had collaborated with WW2 Nazis for example. Gorbachev made it clear to the Warsaw Pact that there would be no Soviet Intervention should their People decide to depose their Governments, while that global Consensus supported the likes of Solidarnosc and Charter 77. Putin's stance in eastern Ukraine couldn't have been any more different while there were as many People against Events in Kiev as there were for them.
Havel called for the concurrent abolishment of NATO after the Warsaw Pact was dismantled, while the CFE Treaty created an effectively demilitarized Zone in the Region. They and former Soviets had an Option of joining either NATO or the Russian Federation, but the Treaty observed understandable Fears People had about a reunified Germany and might History repeat itself?
NATOs presence on the Russian Border did nothing to assuage that while Georgia's Sakashvili merely justified it. His incursion into the Ossettias and George Robertson's muted response not only did all the above, it also invoked Stalin's Attitude in 1944-5 when he established the Pacts Buffer against any future German Aggression.
Former Warsaw Pact and Soviets being in NATO might not have been so provocative to Moscow if Sakashvilli hadn't gone into South Ossettia. After that East-West Relations deteriorated to what they are now.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, back in Arabia I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a Syrian equivalent of Ahmed Chalabi, the exiled Iraqi who became the first Governor of the post-Saddam Governing Council. Had Assad been as soundly defeated, he or they would have appeared and did the same in Damascus. There is a growing feeling among People in military, intel and diplomatic Circles that Mr Chalabi for want of a better Word scammed everyone.
Arms for Hostages ......
ReplyDeleteIn the end, and despite the very murky Doings of the whole Arms for Hostages, Iran-Contra Affair the release of the Hostages - even the American ones - had nothing to do with the Debacle that afflicted certain People in the Reagan Administration.
And, thankfully, Iran-Contra had nothing to do with the Hostages Release.
The Collapse of the Warsaw Pact - sponsors of many of the Militants in the Region, and particularly Lebanon -meant they realised the Game was up. There was no longer a Cold War Element or Motive to the equation, and with the end of Warsaw Pact Governments and Gorbachev's Withdrawal they were left very isolated. Subsequently, the only thing left was to release Hostages they had held for up to 6 years, which they began doing in 1990.
It was the very sensible Realisation in the Kremlin that continued Occupation of, and Support to, eastern European Regimes was crippling Moscow economically that indirectly led to the end of the Hostage Crisis, not the misguided Notion that a few Weapons to Tehran might buy some sway with Iran.
Iran probably also saw the huge concurrent 1990-1 Gulf War Coalition, and manuevres in the UN Security Council that had Syria and Moscow support its Resolutions against Saddam, and prompted them to want to get with the Program after Khomeini. Not a grubby little Arms Deal and a few very right wing Guerillas fighting in Honduras and Nicaragua.
Iran-Contra might even have backfired.
ReplyDeleteWhile it was meant as a surruptitious Overture to "Moderates" in Iran what would have happened if Hardliners discovered a Plot within their own Administration and "the great Satan"? It's as misguided as a Bay of Pigs that would cause Cubans to rise up against Castro. History told us what happened there, while Kennedy was furious with those who had sold it to him.
Assuming the Moderates would somehow throw in their Lot with America and the Population would follow Suit was ridiculous, while Hardliners would have gleaned huge political Capital from it, scotching the pending Rafsanjani Presidency and having a similar Effect "Axis of Evil" did on the Iranian Election of 2005.
It's like the Notion that something similar would happen in Syria. That a few Rebels, supported by the West, would invoke a popular uprising that would sweep Assad away and turn Syria into a liberal Democracy. That he had retained the Presidency despite it shows he enjoys considerable, and robust Support, and it's like America and the West had never learned from the Fiasco of 1961.
Against that Backdrop I'd like to make a Series of Flipchart Diagrams explaining to certain People how a Hostage Campaigner from 30 years ago ISN'T a 9/11 Terrorist. It seems a Mindset exists with those People that did with those who put Iraq, Iran and Libya in the same Club as Al Qaida.
ReplyDeleteCurrently watching "Manufacturing Consent" a fascinating Documentary Film about Noam Chomsky and one thing I certainly agree with him about, and that's the Thesis he wrote about the usual Suspects. The Chat-Show Charlie's they always wheel out to comment on everything, spinning out the same old Party Line, ensuring the Debate never goes anywhere it hasn't already been 1000 times before.
ReplyDeleteAnd I want to make something very clear here .... I am not a Holocaust Denier.
ReplyDeleteQuite the Opposite, and to emphasise that the Jews didn't have the Monopoly on being Millions of its Victims. Go back to Gaul and Ceasar inflicted a Holocaust on them as an estimated 1 Million were killed and another 1 Million hauled off to Slavery, British agricultural Policy in Ireland caused 100s of 1000's to die of Famine in the 1840's, white America's Genocide of Millions of Native Americans, the Turks in their Retreat from Russia in WW1 murdered 500,000 Armenians, Stalin induced another Famine with disastrous Land Reforms that killed Millions, the Khymer Rouge committed Genocide against a Million in Cambodia, the Interimhamwe killed an estimated 1 Million Tutsi's and moderate Hutus in Rwanda, Bosnian Serbs cleansed 100's of 1000's of Bosnians, Extremists working in the Vacuum of the Levant have done the same with various Minorities ..... that either of the Assad's never did.
So the Notion of Holocaust doesn't just apply to Israel or Jewish People. There are 2 things those other Holocausts don't have and they are; becoming a Cliche that loses its Impact the more it is used, and what has been dubbed an Industry.
Iran-Contra = Bay of Pigs ....
ReplyDeleteIt's just as well those responsible for the Iran-Contra Debacle were caught, and more importantly seen to be, particularly in Iran. The moral Bankruptcy that existed in those involved, that thought a Country of 80 Million would sell its Soul for a few Missiles is as astonishing as those who thought a few Miami Cubans would cause a Counter Revolution in Havana 1961.
It was also very dangerous for those Iranian Moderates and Reformers who might have been discovered and executed long before Rafsanjani got anywhere near the Presidency. They would have been rounded up as 5th Columnists, whose Tag as "CIA" wouldn't have been the usual Conspiracy Theory.
In more recent times it'd have been the same for similar if Hillary had got her way and bombed Iranian Facilities. The first to suffer would be those suspected of supporting America.
When post-Ayatollah Iran saw what was happening in Iraq, with both Super-Powers in agreement against it, an Army of nearly 1 Million, with the latest equipment, 4 of which had Nuclear capability, and it included Egypt and Syria, they weren't going to be isolated by the Rhetoric of the 1980's.
Saddam, for his part, had severely misjudged and over-played his Hand.
To claim Iraqi Oil Reserves extended into Kuwait and thus were his is like waging War on Geology. It'd be like a bunch of Fishermen in Grimsby and Frazerborough invading Norway because those Fish that swam in Norwegian territorial Waters also did in theirs, or Hungary invading the Balkans because the Danube, and all its wealth, flowed through them.
The horrible thing about the current World Order is how that Washington-Moscow Consensus has completely gone. In alienating Russia with Georgia and the Ukraine the West, and particularly America, lost a lot of Leverage with Tehran. Moscow, Beijing and Tehran have considerable Influence in Syria, which the West doesn't and no amount of TOW Missiles is going to make that right.
The enormity of the 1990 Gulf War Coalition is matched by that Proxy Alliance, except this time we aren't involved and there is no Russo-American Agreement.
And the Contrast between the mythological Arms for Hostages, and the Reality is horribly ironic.
ReplyDeleteAlmost every Beirut Hostage that was released in the late 1980's to 1991 of every Nationality did so via Syria. Their Journey would begin with being handed over to Syrian backed Amal Militia, who would then pass them to Syrian Troops - then taken to Damascus.
Could that happen now?
While Mr Chalabi spent a long time pouring Honey into the Ears of the Pentagon, then was ignominiously disgraced in 2005-6 and began looking like a Scam Artist - in Afghanistan Ashraf Ghani fled Kabul under allegations he took huge amounts of Afghan Money with him. Not by disgruntled Taliban Fighters discovering empty Vaults and Deposit Boxes, but by Members of his own Army.
ReplyDeleteAfter Afghanistan could Iraq be next?
ReplyDeleteSome have said it couldn't, but it came very close in 2014 when ISIS marched into Sunni Moslem Cities like Tikrit and Mosul. 30,000 Iraqi Soldiers, similarly equipped to the former Afghan Army simply rolled back in the Face of about 1000 ISIS Fighters. In the end they ran at least half the Country, while ironically - what prevented them from running the rest, including Baghdad, were Iranian Fighters led by Qassem Suleimani. Unfortunately he was assassinated soon after arriving in Baghdad. He was killed in a US drone strike alongside influential Iraqi militia leader Abu Mahdi Al Muhandis near the city’s airport.
This caused Tension in an already fractious Relationship Tehran has with America, which could compromise their Willingness to do the same again should an Insurgency start. Even if they did, and proved as capable as they were before they can attach a huge Caviat to it all which means Tehran has a huge Influence on any Iraq that appears after it.
The same applies to Iraqis loyal to the late Abu Mahdi Al Muhandis should they decide to put up a similar Fight. That they will want something more akin to them than anything the US or their Clients had in mind.
The Population generally is very sceptical of any so called democracy, fed up with the corrupt revolving Door of the next batch of self-serving Politicians and antipathetic about the whole 'New East' Enterprise. They are as weary as the Afghanis who saw Taliban Fighters capture Afghanistan in only a few Weeks.
Iraq could fracture like it was 7 years ago with an ISIS type Caliphate, except this time it could remain like that while Forces running the rest won't be as loyal to a West that killed 2 of its most effective Leaders.
Comparisons to Vietnam?
ReplyDeleteIraq is more diverse than Vietnam, whose North-South divide was Political. NVA and VC Fighters were as Vietnamese as the ARVN - while Iraq has Sunni, Shia and Kurdish Elements that make up it's Society.... with their relevant Fighters and Peshmurga. Any Progress via Iraqi'isation by America in an attempt to reflect this was undone by the Maliki Government - who purged Sunni and Kurdish People and replaced them with his Cronies.
Thus, any potential multi-ethnic, multi-faith unified Stand against Insurgents was dismantled. The effect could be very similar to what happened when Paul Bremer de-ba'athisised Iraq after Saddam. Not only did you not have an intact, potentially supportive Army, you suddenly had 300,000 potential Enemies who owed you no Loyalty at all.
The Government in Baghdad now has Sunnis who will be the same, potential Friends who are now Enemies, or at best ambivalent and detached. The Kurds will concentrate on their Region in the North East.
One closer similarity could be how Sunnis and Islamist Elements operate their equivalent of a Tet Offensive. Taking advantage of the Tet Holiday, north Vietnamese Fighters had spent months building up Arms supplies and Fighters in key South Vietnam Cities while the Authorities were completely unaware of it. Suddenly they struck, and although it failed it fought ARVN and US Troops on its back Foot for a while and shocked them by its Violence and efficiency.
Any Insurgency in Iraq could be the same - with Government Forces being unaware of any build-up until it happens.
It could never happen here ......
ReplyDeletePeople were probably saying over the Dining Table in Beirut. After all, look at all that Oil Money - Saudi, Kuwaiti, Syrian, Iraqi, the Shahs Iran - flowing through Lebanese Banks like Black Gold. Look at the Beiruti Lifestyle as the Aouns and Chamouns sip Cocktails on the Terraces of Beiruts Seafront Bars, the Club's, Waterskiing, Holidaying. Look at the Holiday Inn and Hilton Hotel investment in the District, Jewelers and Boutiques, Ski Resorts in the Chouf Mountains, the Cedars of the Beka'a Valley - the ancient Phoenician and Biblical History - why would anyone have a War here? The wealthiest City in the wealthiest Country in the Levant, richer than Tel Aviv, particularly as most of that Beirut Seafront is in the Moslem West of the City along with the Airport. The Druze controlled the Shouf Mountains and Beka'a Valley.
It could never happen here Christian, Jew, Moslem, Atheist, Socialist, Conservative, Blue Collar, White Collar, no Collar - as all the Children of Abraham worked, rested and played like Generations before them in Sarajevo. They probably said the same amongst the many Tourists in Dubrovnik and Ski Holiday Enthusiasts in the Mountains of Croatia or snorkeling in the Adriatic.
But it did as the Veneer of Consensus was finally wrought asunder by the Miasma of Problems simmering just below the Surface.
It could never happen here John Bull might say as he sipped his English Ale, ate his Fish and Chips and watched the Football/Cricket in the Pub. The Money, the very wealthy, the hereditary Landowners, the twee Tolkienesque little Englanders, the sleek 4x4ers, the neo-Elite with their Property Empires like neo-Feudalism, the Yuppie Wealth in the 5th richest Country in the World as Johnny sits back and orders another Ale. "Howzat" the Umpire says at the televisualised Oval.
Cont...d
Why Couldn't it, as so many different things simmer below the Surface?
ReplyDeleteThe United Kingdom is a Federation as diverse as the former Yugoslavia, and wealthier than Lebanon, but it's all a Veneer that wears thinner every year.
Northern Ireland was always a sticky Wicket wracked by Decades of sectarian Violence, but still coveted by the South. It's Constitution derived from its - then - 2/3 Protestant, 1/3 Catholic Demography has gradually been eroded as the Latter have caught up. What the Republic tried to achieve by the Bomb could now be done with the Ballot Box if they vote for reunification. Once the result is announced the nominally dormant UVF could rediscover it's Call to Arms. The Protestant Backlash could be huge as the UVF - which once had 100,000 - wasn't a few dozen Paramilitaries - it was an Army that could equal any in Croatia or Bosnia - even Lebanon. Lots of People in America to fund either Nationalist or Loyalist, as they have in the past - like the Proxies in the Balkans and Lebanon. Before Euro-Remainers blanch at a Backlash against a Referendum, how did they react to the Euro-Referendum 5 years ago? How did People in America respond to Donald Trump's Election Victory that year?
In Scotland the Nationalists scored a 48% "Yes" to independence Vote in the Referendum. The pro-Europe Leader of the Scottish Parliament Nicola Sturgeon is firmly at odds with the Brexit Prime Minister. In the post-Referendum Election the Scottish Labour Party ceased to exist as even their Leader barely kept his Seat against the SNP Onslaught. If they had another Referendum now that meagre 2% could evaporate in an overwhelming "Aye" to independence. Suddenly a similar thing starts happening as cessessionist Nationalists are pitted against Unionist Loyalists - and the former won't be like the Jacobites, wanting to install a Stewart King on the English Throne.
Sturgeon even closed the Anglo-Scottish Border during the Pandemic, causing checkpoints at every Crossing not seen since the Romans.
In Wales, all they had to do was abolish Tolls on the Second Severn Crossing to cause a huge increase in Property Prices in Monmouthshire, as Estate Agents had never been so busy selling to English Commuters wanting to travel Toll free to Work in Bristol and the South West. A Sense of Deja Vu must have happened amongst Veterans of Mebion Glyndwr when something similar prompted them to torch English Holiday Homes in Wales. Not as prevalent or well funded as the IRA or INLA and not as murderous, but no less committed to War against the colonising English buying up Wales by the Acre.
ReplyDeleteIt's happening in the North too as Prices in Gwynedd start to creep up, becoming inaccessible to the Welsh.
England itself is a Nation of Regions. Northern England, it's People and Economy very different to that of the South, particularly the South East, where all the Money is. The West of England, different again, as Wessex Regionalists have campaigned for Devolution and Cornish Natives, with their own Celtic Language, are pissed at seeing their County become one of Holiday Homes. Cornwall has been completely colonised - as has south Devon, the Foothills of Dartmoor and the English Riviera.
Covid19 showed the North-South Divide as northern Mayors complained about sweeping southern Directives that seemed oblivious to their unique Problems, while also showing the chronic fiscal inequality. And that - which also extends to large swathes of Wales and Scotland - is something not seen as acutely in a Yugoslavia after years of Communism. Britain's Money could contribute to the Problem, because let's be honest, to access it is a Game with more Rigging than a Slave Ship however hard you work. Here in the Portishead Theme Park there seem to be an endless Stream of Places to spend Money,but very few to make any.
As Lebanon and post-Tito Yugoslavia were run by successive, increasingly weak Government, we are seeing the same here. If Britain fractured their Hold on the Country would diminish while the Army - once Guarantors of the Union, and the Media - it's Propagandists - would fracture accordingly into their Constituent Parts! The Divide and Rule Policy that has gone on for nearly 30 years, (and who was responsible for that I wonder) whose Manifestation is very apparent in Petri-Dish erzatz Communities like Portishead, merely accelerates the Process. Made worse by the War in Iraq which proved to be very divisive, so did the Brexit Result as People fell out with each other on the Issue.
But it could never happen here!!!!!
Throwing into the Mix millions of angry Arabs and Afghanis - made homeless and bereft by a War that seems so futile - and a post-War Policy that was disastrous - does nothing to assuage this as the Risk of resurgent Islamic Terrorism is vastly increased. At the moment Afghanis are still reeling in Shock at what has just happened, and what is currently happening. When that wears off, like a Wound, the Pain starts. There seemed to be a stunned unreality in the West as Story after Story came from Kabul in August this year.
ReplyDeleteAnd how did they play Divide and Rule in Britain .... here even, to fracture the Consensus at the end of the 80's so it was gone by the end of the 90's?
ReplyDelete"Until the Unity is threatened by those who have and who have not, those who are with and those who are without!" ("Walls come tumbling down").
Let's create a Pop Group they can squabble over, let's cultivate a Mediocratic Elite complete with sleekness and opulence, while deliberately keeping others down and out. They did it with these things so the Divide had been there long before the old Power Station Gate became a boundary to the "new town". They encouraged the Scum and Villainy at the Expense of something better!
Gosh, gasp - how could I say that?
How has America worked in the last 55 years?
Khun Sah was a good capitalist indochinese Boy until his Heroin started turning white middle Class youth into Addicts in the 70's. Alphonse Noriega was a useful Puppet in Panama until he went freelance and became a Problem. The Moujahedin and Bin Laden were cool while they beat up Russian Soldiers in Afghanistan and it was the same with Saddam as he did so with Iran. Nice, big List of Scum and Villainy, all bought and paid for by good old Uncle Sam.
So who was financing Portishead Inc in the 90's, post 90's? Who was encouraging the Scum and Villainy of the Town in that time?
They did it with the New Ageocracy too, courtesy of Peter Jackson in the 21st Century ..... Hence the Yuppie Hippie, or Yippie!
ReplyDeleteAnd then, in 2001 and 2003 they started incinerating Iraqi and Syrian Cities and Afghani Villages so the Scum and Villainy could have their post-90's Lebensraum and more go-Juice for their SUV so they can cruise around like Action Man or Chuck Norris!
Here's some tremendous Stuff on the Subject of post-Saddam Iraq by Iraqi Refugees, former UN Monitors and other informed Sources ......
ReplyDeletehttps://www.quora.com/Is-Iraq-a-better-place-or-worse-to-live-since-the-fall-of-Saddam-Hussein
And I had to highlight this Comment from an Iraqi, now living in America ......
Is Iraq safer after Saddam?
"Nope, it's not safer. It was safe before 2003 but we didn't have freedom of speech, and any sort of democracy, but we had a country, a respected country. Now after 2003, we have free election to choose from a bunch of thieves and criminals to control a place once upon a time was a country."
Kabulcentricism .....
ReplyDeleteI'm not reading Stuff or seeing Videos of People fleeing regional Capitals like they did Kabul. Many Cities surrendered without a Fight, but there doesn't seem to be the same Scenes of desperation shown from Kabul.
Obviously, the former Government, Civil Service, Military and many 1000's working in ancillary Jobs with these would be anxious to leave for fear of Reprisals from the Taliban, as will Activists and anyone the Taliban might regard as undesirable, but all this seems to be happening in the Capital.
The rest of the Country is either resigned to Taliban Rule - or just as likely relieved that the 20 year War, indecisive and with a botched post-War exit strategy has finally ended, just like they were after the Civil War in the 90's. That even during the years of Transition - once the Taliban had left the Capital - Afghani Trainees killed their American Sponsors ought to have been regarded as a Harbinger as to how things might emerge once America started leaving.
Thus, what we have seen in the last Month ought to be interpreted as the end of the Regime and it's Support in the Capital, not the whole Country.
Also, having just seen John Simpsons Panorama Show about the end of Taliban 1 it seemed the Northern Alliance did most of the Fighting in the initial stages of the War anyway. Just how much of that was compromised by the botched Policies applied since?
One only has to see what happened in Iraq - with the killing of Quasem Soleimani - to figure that one. Except the Loyalty Question could be asked of Washington rather than anywhere else there!
Ironically, Mr Soleimani was Iraq's best hope of quashing any Insurgency if the Country starts going the same way as Afghanistan. He was the main Player in the Fight to regain Territory held by ISIS, and would have given any Fight against future Insurgents popular Legitimacy!
ReplyDeleteSome have rather misguidedly compared Mr Soleimani's Assassination to that of the shooting down of Admiral Yamamoto's Plane in WW2. In the context of this ..........
ReplyDelete"Following the September 11 attacks in 2001, senior U.S. State Department official Ryan Crocker flew to Geneva to meet with Iranian diplomats who were under the leadership of Soleimani with the purpose of collaborating to destroy the Taliban. This collaboration was instrumental in defining the targets of air bombing operations in Afghanistan and in capturing key Al-Qaeda operatives, but suddenly ended in January 2002, when President George W. Bush named Iran as part of the "Axis of evil" in his State of the Union address."
.......it was more akin to the shooting down of Iranian Air Flight 655.
Mr Soleimani's Representatives were developing Strategies to tackle the Taliban and Al Qaida with the Americans, while in 1988 there were very positive Negotiations with Iran to secure the release of Western Hostages in Beirut.
The Iran-US Collaboration - an unprecedented Co-operation between Tehran and Washington - was abruptly ended after GWB's "Axis of Evil" Gaffe, while a potential Thaw in Anglo-Iranian Relations via Hostage Negotiations (even during the Khomeini Era) was completely destroyed by the shooting down of the Airliner.
It prompts Questions about there ever being any intention of there ever being any future meaningful Dialogue on Washingtons part with Iran!
People might say that Stalin collaborated with Britain, America and other Allies before a Cold War that lasted 40 years, but neither Presidents or Prime Ministers up to his Death in 1953 ever considered killing him!
Mr Soleimani might have been a very substantial key Player in ensuring a safer World Order had those Meetings continued in 2002 than the terrible morass we have now.
And before People baulk at the Notion that intermediaries with America and Mr Soleimani might have staved off the very dangerous Impasse with Iran it was Alexandre Felikovs Connection with Khrushchev as interlocutor with John Scali (an ABC Journalist) that prevented a very hot War only Hours away in 1962.
ReplyDeleteScali wasn't in Kennedy's Cabinet, and wasn't even a low ranking Diplomat, while Feliksov wasn't a Soviet Ambassador - but if their Meeting could resolve that, how effective would Meetings between a high level American Statesman and Representatives of Iran's second most powerful Man have been?
Who are they going to negotiate with now who might have the necessary Gravitas to be effective?
ReplyDeleteWhat seems like many years ago Tony Blair had his Summit with Muammar Gaddafi - who then got killed!
One of the Reasons I might have voted for Donald Trump was because he wasn't the Woman who sacrificed an American Diplomat, or who was behind the Libyan Leaders Death - plunging North Africa's biggest Oil Economy into Chaos and Violence!
Then he does the same darned thing with Mr Soleimani.
And I'm not a Conspiracy Theorist who believes Christopher Stephens (the killed Ambassador) was part of a Plot to ship Weapons to Syrian Rebels either.
ReplyDeleteI just think what happened in Benghazi was due to neglect rather than anything more sinister. That the Defence Department failed to implement adequate Protection in a potentially dangerous Situation. While Hillary failed to guarantee their Safety is a bit like her Husband failing to tackle Al Qaida years before 9/11.
It seems the Weapons of mass Manipulation, Ignorance and historical Distortion are at it again .......
ReplyDeleteIn other Words, we're back in Waitrose and those Yippies, deep in the depths of Chilcot and all the other Stuff that epitomises the 21st Century.
Before I launch my Airstrike on the Bunkers containing those Weapons of Mass Ignorance here is the Background.
Sat in Waitrose Cafe having a Coffee a couple of Yippies were stood on either side. One of them seems to have "behaviour Issues" involving Fox Terriers, the other Ms Herriot. Sure enough, it looks like a re-run of a Photograph of former Serb President Slobodan Milosivich, the Caption reading "Slobodan Milosovich - Serbian Hitler". I most sincerely hope those People aren't implying the same thing here, because they might be too thick and stupid to see the difference between what Josip Broz might have represented, and Mr Milosovich. One of them, supposedly a University educated Socialist most certainly ought to.
Tony Blair has no excuse for any Ignorance in this regard either!
Particularly as someone we were associated with helped Tito fight Nazis in Yugoslavia, including the dreaded Ustasche Croat Facists.
Not surprised those Millenials are so crap at War and Peace, after all those People are where they get their Information from!
It's as insulting as a Scene from a Spielberg TV Show involving an Autobahn that made me want to flypost outside a certain Embassy copies of the Balfour Declaration.
But then, let's not forget we lost more Troops in the 1990-1 Gulf War to the Americans than Saddam's Republican Guard!
That supposedly University educated Socialist was campaigning for the Labour Party a few years ago. If the Labour Party of the last 24 years can't tell the difference between a Leader like Tito who quashed every form of Balkan Nationalism (as Croat as Franjo Trujdman) and one who encouraged it with a Process of Cause and Effect then maybe they shouldn't have been waging War at all!
ReplyDeleteAnd when they aren't fiddling with that how about the North and South Word Creeping?
ReplyDeleteWord Creeping is what I call People manipulating Syllables to create other things. For example; if you gradually turned Inverness - Capital of the Scottish Highlands - into a Loch, and then a Monster!
Next thing you know they'll get a racist Homophobic Biker in Bristol, and make him look like Ulysses S Grant!
Or when they turn an Address into a messy Smith (in German).
ReplyDeleteWhat Colour did the Confederacy wear again?
ReplyDeleteAnd having mentioned the former Yugoslavia - one thing synonymous with all that in the 90's, when the Expression became common Parlance - was Ethnic Cleansing. The thing is, while all that went on in the Balkans what was happening here?
ReplyDeleteWhen you have a Regime when People in their 50's become Grandparents and others have no Relationship at all that's Ethnic Cleansing at Source. You don't even allow them a Family to be cleansed at all!
So when do we have the NATO Airstrike against the Regime here?
ReplyDeleteOh, there are so many Inconsistencies and Hypocrisies involved in this Story, not lost in Readers in Belgrade or Sarajevo. A Serb might say; "When we did all that they bombed our TV Station", while a Bosnian could ask; "Where was the same, prompt, Commitment from the West as there was when Saddam invaded Kuwait?" Something that could be applied here!
Those W.M.Is (Weapons of Mass Ignorance)...... Continued!
ReplyDeleteIt seems - after a 'Weapons Inspection" certain People are definitely in possession of W.M.I's!
A Group that became very prominent at the end of the 1990's was the Kosovo Liberation Army - KLA (or UCK)! Albanian Kosovars who fought Serbs in a civil War for independence in the autonomous Province.
Now they are independent there might still be People who are ignorant of the difference between Milosovich, who they fought, and Tito, who they didn't. As things deteriorated between the 2 ethnic Groups in the 90's Countries began increasing Restrictions on Kosovar Immigration, and when that Trickle turned into a Flood during the Conflict they closed their Borders to them almost completely.
This hasn't changed in the years since, even after they gained their Independence. They are a predominantly young Population trapped in a very small Country described by a Kosovar Journalist as a huge, noisy Coffee Shop.
During Tito's era they were free to travel because they wanted to, which they did, seeing other Cultures in Western Europe and elsewhere. During Milosovich and the rise of Serbian Nationalism they did more so under Duress and for ethnic and economic Reasons. The Kosovar Diaspora finances Families left in the Country, while many others are stigmatised as unwanted stereotypical Refugees.
So there are many differences to the quality of Life they had as part of Tito's Yugoslavia and that of Milosivich's greater Serbia.
If the dinner party Socialists of our local Labour Party can prove to me they know those Differences they might be worth voting for.
Here are the current British Government Guidelines on traveling to Libya ....
ReplyDeletehttps://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/libya/safety-and-security
At least they don't try and hide how bad the Situation is, and it appears to be as bad as, if not worse, than Iraq.
Also, having seen what is happening to Employees of Companies subcontracted to Iraq, providing Transport - I'm amazed they don't circle the Trucks every night, while Haliburton seems to have scant regard for their Safety. Sending a Convoy of Civilians into hostile Territory in Olive Drab Vehicles, without Protection is like sending a Bullet Magnet. To make matters worse they are being sent with partially and completely empty Trucks because the Company gets paid for every Journey they make. Also, if Vehicles get damaged or need maintainance they aren't repaired, they're torched or blown up so the Company can bill the Government for replacements. It's a License to print Money.
The Opinion many Drivers have is they are expendable to the Profit Motive. It seems this attitude extended to everyone, and while Members of the American Diplomatic Corp were sacrificed in Libya, left vulnerable in a very dangerous Area, what would that have said about People in the Military?
Would they have been as expendable as Christopher Stephens was?
Did "Axis of Evil" ultimately cost the Alliance Afghanistan?
ReplyDeleteFollowing the September 11 attacks in 2001, senior U.S. State Department official Ryan Crocker flew to Geneva to meet with Iranian diplomats who were under the leadership of Qasem Soleimani with the purpose of collaborating to destroy the Taliban. This collaboration was instrumental in defining the targets of air bombing operations in Afghanistan and in capturing key Al-Qaeda operatives, but suddenly ended in January 2002, when President George W. Bush named Iran as part of the "Axis of evil" in his State of the Union address.
The implication here is it probably did. A continued Collaboration with Iran (Khatami was no Friend to the Taliban) might have consolidated Operations in Afghanistan and bolstered efforts to thwart the Taliban and other Islamic Terrorists. It would have given those Efforts considerable legitimacy in an Islamic World sceptical of the West and garnered Iranian Support for the Operation.
Had GWB not prompted the Cooperation to suddenly end in 2002 this could have continued - and might even still be happening now. Afghanistan's former, all too temporary, Government might still be in power and the whole thing look rather more credible than it now does.
Once this Partnership had been established there are possibilities for further cooperation elsewhere, politically as well as militarily! Seen to be working with Qasem Soleimani garners considerable Kudos in a Country that has denounced America as "the great Satan" since 1979.
Unfortunately, after 2002 all this was squandered. Iran's Relations with Afghanistan deteriorated with the increasing American Influence. Thus a once Key Player in the Battle against the Taliban and their Clients wasn't only lost, it might even have given tacit Support to Taliban efforts to undermine the, then, new Government in Kabul.
All of this might not only have been avoided, but also the opposite might have applied, so yes, I would say "Axis of Evil" probably, ultimately led to the loss of Afghanistan!
Not only did "Axis of Evil" ultimately lose Afghanistan, it also lost a valuable Opportunity, the Chance to repair a Rift with Tehran that had existed for more than 20 years.
ReplyDeleteThis has proved to be very dangerous - as we began to see during the Tanker Wars in recent years, and the shooting down of Flight 655 in not so recent ones.
As Tony Blair's Treaty with Gadaffi proved, they can be undone very quickly and are nothing more than an Agreement between 2 Combatants. A working Partnership is different, and strengthens Relations between People's. Churchill might have been a vehement anti-Communist but he was quite prepared to work with Stalin in a mutually agreeable Alliance.
Has someone put a D Notice on Iraq in the last few days?
ReplyDeleteIs no News good ..... or bad ..... as there hasn't been very much, if anything from there since the Election?
Hopefully it means Iraq has settled into a day to day Routine that doesn't merit Coverage (ie; no Insurgency, Bombing, Assassination, Scandal, Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Refugee Crisis, Botch-ups or any of the other Stuff all too associated with it) or we are being led into a false sense of Security about it all?
The downside to this is how Mr Sadr seems to be completely off the Hook when it comes to Scrutiny. After all, the World wants to know if his Emergence was worth the Carnage inflicted, the human and fiscal Cost, the Damage - the Drain on Resources that might have been spent elsewhere and Controversies.
It just seems odd when you Google "Iraq News latest" you no longer get the Strip of Stories at the top of the Page and just the usual List of News Companies, running Stories that are at least a few days old and going as far back as 2020.
I've often wondered if Al Qaida were a Bulshit Terrorist Organisation ....
ReplyDeleteThe name O Sam A could be used by the Ministry of Word Manipulation just like the 'Management' fiddle with those trisylaballic Words. Bin Lad en? - Would that be something to do with Garbage or those "Full Houses", and maybe even young Men as much as an Arabic Name?
While the IRA fought for a united Ireland, loyalist Paramilitaries the opposite Response, ETA want an autonomous Basque Region in Spain, the Palestinians a Homeland for Palestinian People, the various Narco Terrorists are just Gangsters furthering their business Interests, the hard-Left Groups of the 60's and 70's set out to destroy Capitalism and White Supremacists are hardcore Racists - what exactly are the Objectives of Al Qaida?
It can't be anything to do with the Koran because there are parts of it that forbid some of the things they do, while the very skewed Allegiances in the Afghan-Soviet War and more recent Conflicts in Arabia and North Africa suggest an inconsistency in their Policy.
Also, why were Governments reluctant to neutralise them after the WTC Bombing in 1993 or the other Acts of Terrorism they committed? 100's dead, 1000's injured - all done with apparent impunity. In just 2 years they racked up a Body Count it took the IRA 10 years to achieve.
Was Bin Laden ever caught and killed anyway? The US Navy ditched a Body at Sea they claimed was his, but was it? When Jesse James was killed they displayed his Corpse for a Week so People could conclusively obtain Closure in the Activities of the James-Younger Gang, although they still had Support from some quarters. Many a Traitors Head was displayed to the World - sometimes for years - as a Message to whatever they represented - however justifiable it might seem now. But the World, and more specifically the American People - were denied the Right to finally confront him.
Then it was like they began clearing away the Witnesses, either behind closed Doors (Saddam) or by Mob Assassination (Gaddafi). It was like the Mob dispatching Abe Reles before he could inform on any other "Murder Incorporated" Operatives, so no-one, from the 1000's crippled or killed by Gulf War Syndrome, Kurds and the Victims of Locherbie ever got closure on any of that either.
And if that War was about punishing Saddam, he isn't being punished at all. Someone like that probably factored in the possibility that he might be killed, either by Coup, Assassin, Bombing or Battle. The People doing the suffering, and thus taking the Punishment, are the Iraqi People!
ReplyDeleteIf those who wanted that War were serious about deposing him they could have fired a Cruise Missile at wherever he was without all the other Trauma and Destruction.
If they did that the Military Industrial Complex only gets to sell one Cruise Missile, not the Trillions of USD's they made on everything else, from Bullets to freelance Torturers.
ReplyDeleteThere's a great Documentary about all that - telling us how much some of those Companies made.
And while Mikhail Gorbachev and Hafez Assad supported the Coalition ranged against Saddam in 1990 (the former the UN Resolution against him) what sort of War did they see compared to the one Bashar Assad and Vladimir Putin saw in 2003?
ReplyDeleteISIS a horrible Irony......
ReplyDeleteWhat is particularly ironic about the Islamic State Group - otherwise known as ISIS - is how they symbolise how skewed everything is in the Middle East. How they are allegedly supported by Americas main Ally in the Region Saudi Arabia, and even America itself, with further Allegations of Support from Turkey and Qatar - and even Israel - they are fought by Iran's Proxy Hezbollah and Syria, with help from Americas main Client Iraq. That they were even fought by Al Qaida.
How America tacitly supported them because they were against Assad's Government in Damascus.
And how they were fought by Turkeys Bane the Kurds - who also provided safe Haven for the many Groups fleeing their War.
It's also the Name itself.
As Islam spread across the vast Corridor that extended from the Moroccan Coast to the Indo-Pakisktan Border with Arabs, Berbers, Turks and Persians in its Orbit it also took in Egypt. As a Gesture against the ancient Religion and Culture of the Nile 7th Century Moslems chiseled off the Faces and deliberately vandalised the Carvings of the Monuments, one of whom was the Egyptian God Isis.
Maybe everyone from Egyptologists to Fans of a certain Film starring Elizabeth Taylor should reclaim him from the Terrorist Group that was grown in the Foreign Policy Test Tube to cause trouble in the Levant.
And those of us struggling against either sloppy or cynical Narratives by Writers who ought to know better that tries turning us into them should establish how we neither have, or want, anything to with them, however many spooky Emails we might get from supposed make money online Gurus!
ReplyDeleteThat Narrative is as disgusting as certain HBO TV Shows that try and turn you into Nazis with Scenes involving Autobahns.... even when they know it's completely wide of the Mark.
ReplyDeleteWhile the Russians see through the far too obvious attempts to say ISIS did the Crocus Theatre Attack, including the so called claims from them that they did, other Russian Commentators are scathing of Brain dead Idiots who get their History from Hollywood while others have decided to boycott HBO Products.
Hardly surprising Groups like ISIS could flourish in the last 15-20 years with such sloppy and cynical Media.
The Situation in the Middle East became unwieldy and convoluted to the point of farcical.
ReplyDeleteYou had an Iraqi Government, backed by the US, but whose People have more loyalty to Tehran than they ever could Washington, supporting a Syrian Government who were supported by Russia and Iran fighting American and Western backed Rebels, who were also fighting Saudi backed Islamists who were fighting Kurds whose support came from whoever they weren't disliked by at any given time to the Chagrin of Turkey - who are in NATO!
"Yes Prime Minister!"
It's so convoluted it really does read like a Script used by Nigel Hawthorn and Paul Eddington in the famous TV Series.
If only it could be imbued with such Humour were it not so tragic!