In favour of war

[andrewducker]

Anyone want to read this and then tell me they're not in favour of war?

Comments

I can.

[nosrialleon.livejournal.com]

It has been said again
and again
and again
and again:
no one is denying that this guy is bad news. The things printed here are par for his course and have been for the 23 years he's been in power. He's a murderous thug. He is, in short, EXACTLY the kind of guy your government and mine have historically preferred to leave in command of unstable regions throughout the world. The primary difference between him and our 'allies' in the region - the ruliing families of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait; murderous thugs, all - is that he is a peasant by birth.

So, a member of Tony Blair's party uses her access to press on the eve of war and says "oh, by the way: here's a bunch of unpleasant stuff I've heard." That's a fairly classic propoganda ploy, and is the political equivalent of a salesman calling to check that you are happy with a major purchase. That stuff was going on 20 years ago; and we (the US) were so blind with rage at Iran that we did not care. We gave him all the weaponry he needed to make Iran miserable, and if he also used it to maintain his power, so be it.

It could (and has) been said that since he is our fault we have an obligation to remove him. But really, the political and national makeup of the whole regoin is our fault; the US and Britain drew up the boundry lines of the Middle East at the end of WWII. The region has been in fairly constant turmoil ever since. Will there ever be a point at which we declare it good enough, or will we be forever meddling in the affairs of Arabs?

My country has exactly one interest in the region. It is black, plentiful, and easily recovered. My President's handlers know exactly which pretty words to say to make people believe that this is about issues of high morality. It is not. It is a business scam.