Skip to main content

Ostriches....and dopes!

The debate about the Iraq War continues to rage, but Mike Carleton in his weekly column in the SMH pointedly reminds us about the ostriches - and dopes, many of whom inhabit the Murdoch press - who saw and still see all good in the Iraq fiasco and tragedy:

"On the subject of ostrich heads stuck firmly in the sand, will the self-styled culture warriors of our right-wing punditocracy ever acknowledge how disastrously wrong they were about the Iraq war?

It's all on the record. "As we approach war with Iraq, it's becoming obvious that George W. Bush is really a modern Winston Churchill," gushed Greg Sheridan, foreign editor of The Australian, back in January 2003.

By April that year, just weeks after the American and coalition invasion, he and his fellow armchair strategists had the war done and won.

"All of the media analysts and many of the military analysts should hang their heads in shame," Sheridan wrote in the Oz. "Everything they told us was wrong. [Donald] Rumsfeld's historic project - transforming the US military into a lighter, faster, more precise and much more mobile beast - has had a huge boost."

Melbourne's village idiot, Andrew Bolt, a Herald Sun columnist, was also in triumphalist mode, almost capering in the streets. "No victory has been more complete and few can have promised so much good," he trumpeted to his readers.

On April 13, 2003, Gerard Henderson announced it was "time to junk the Vietnam association. In recent months, quite a few critics of George W. Bush's policy in the Gulf have warned that the United States could get bogged down in a Middle East quagmire similar to that which the US faced during the Vietnam War … Such an analysis demonstrates a misunderstanding of both the US commitment in Vietnam and contemporary America."

As late as February 2005, The Daily Telegraph's pompous bloviator-in-chief, Piers Akerman, was still hard at it: "Recollect our own quagmirists, those in the media who saw parallels with Vietnam?" he blathered. "Those puling broadcasters who all but wished defeat upon those who took the fight to Saddam when the UN Security Council dingoed its own resolutions? The determined turnout in Iraq is a vindication of the true global visionaries."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...