I supported the war, albeit reluctantly. I’m aware that America and her allies now owe a responsibility to the Iraqi people to rebuild the country we screwed over for 30 years and then bombed the remnants out of existence.
It’s unfortunate, then, that the US army features people so incompetent and/or terrified that they happily shoot their own puppet officials when they dare disagree with them… wow, what a big improvement on the previous regime. I hope the soldiers responsible are court-martialled and jailed for a very long time.
Meanwhile, Ken Livingstone should probably watch his back.
Hi John B.- In response to your comment, I, Ed thomas, decided to go further into you site than I did when I flippantly flipped it onto my screen for an instant. I did notice that you were supposedly centrist (whatever), but felt that the marxist angle held the attention better. I’m sorry if it got you annoyed. Your e-mail address was the first thing I looked at, before I realised you had a site.
To go back to the centrist thing- surely that depends on what political geography you place yourself by- whether most of your friends are marxist, or whether Labour or the Tories are commanding the cultural agenda, or even what country you count as your spiritual home for that matter?
Taking the above post, it, er, doesn’t sound very sympathetic to people trying to carry out a very difficult task. If one supports the task- trying to move Iraq on from SH, then even in order to constructively criticise one needs to establish some form of trust. That’s one of the criticisms of the Beeb- they value trust because it makes them powerful rather than because it makes them useful, so they target the wrong people for the wrong sort of trust (especially given their British psb remit). The trust and interaction between them and the US, British, or coalition military is not much of a concern to them, but in terms of helping to make Iraq a success, it’s very important. The Troops are not media savvy. I don’t even think that Centcom are particularly, and you can hardly say that Rumsfeld is all that media savvy, unless you mean he’s a machievellian pragmatist- just enough good news to get the job done, and bully through the rest of the time. No, I think the BBC have a reponsibility to be supportive and humane, and I don’t think the BBC have been, when I think that the US has been supportive and humane towards the Iraqi people (compared to the rest anyway).
On the visit to London- I am genuinely concerned that within the large muslim immigrant population of London there may be those who would try to assassinate the President. You might think that’s nothing to worry about, but I think that the foreign policy implications would be terrible and would cost a lot more lives. As for the security of the marchers- when was the last time anyone shot dead a protester either here or in the US? Are you expecting Bloody Sunday again? I honestly don’t think that anyone would take the time to kill Ken either, and he’s about to be re-newlabourised.
As a supporter of the action in Iraq, I might have thought that you’d not join the chorus of morale sapping comments denigrating the soldiers, their leader or their countries. The march will be spectacle enough, without adding to the noise online.
Oh well, maybe that’s what being ‘centrist’ means.
btw- I’d be interested to know if I might be the BBBC member who is so pro-Israeli he’d like to hear no criticism at all of them. If so, then that’s wrong- I’ve just heard so much on the same tired anti-Israel lines over the years from the Beeb that I’d like to try a new approach and see if we can actually make some sense form the situation.
Anyway, as you’ll gather from the amount I’ve written, your comments are noticed and, to a degree, welcomed. I’m actually in favour of the comments being debating grounds, and people getting more from a story than a small post is able to- after all, we’re amateurs like most people.
ed thomas
Ed –
Thanks very much for your (very detailed!) comment.
Re centrist: I’m to the left of my leftist friends (few of whom are Marxists), and to the right of my Tory friends, to the extent that these labels mean anything. I’m also very socially anti-authoritarian, which is why I claim extremism I guess.
Re the mayor: the post isn’t hugely sympathetic to the soldiers, because I was hugely annoyed by the story. It’s -exactly- the sort of thing the coalition shouldn’t be doing. Although the Iraqi people are currently on side, I fear this won’t last: as the Baathists and assorted nutcases step up their bombings, it’s going to be hard to prevent more incidents like this one, as soldiers get increasingly scared. They need strong orders not to shoot on sight in such cases, even if that means higher coalition casualties. And if Centcom aren’t media savvy, that reflects breathtaking incompetence on their part.
Re Bush: much as I don’t like the man, obviously it’d be terrible if he were shot, by both sides or otherwise. Both because of the inherent rubbishness of assassinating elected politicians, and because the effect it’d have on American public opinion would not be condusive to world peace. However, I’m far less convinced that there are people who want to shoot him in the UK (Blair isn’t protected 24/7 by 200 armed guards, isn’t popular among the same elements, and hasn’t been shot so far).
Re breakfast: my girlfriend has woken up so I’m going to go and make it. More to follow later, possibly.