A blog by Luke Akehurst about politics, elections, and the Labour Party - With subtitles for the Hard of Left. Just for the record: all the views expressed here are entirely personal and do not necessarily represent the positions of any organisations I am a member of.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Progress Column

My Progress column this week is about the Afghanistan and Iraq wars:



Anonymous Anonymous said...

"In the week of the anniversary of 9/11"

The second 9/11. The first 9/11 was the US-backed coup in Chile in 1973 on which Luke is totally silent.

"I have tried to imagine an alternative world where the US and its allies did not invade Afghanistan and then Iraq."

Try imagining a world where the Bush administration did not ignore the warnings!

Presidential Daily Briefing 6 August 2001 entitled
"Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US"

And there is this extract from the 9/11 report itself:

"The 9/11 attacks were a shock but they should not have come as a surprise"

"Iraq was not directly linked to 9/11"

Correction: It was not linked to it at all!

"ballistic missile technology the North Koreans were selling to anyone"

But the Bush administration deliberately scuppered the improved relations and agreements that the Clinton administration came so close to achieving with that country. If the North Koreans will sell to anyone, why don't we buy them off them ourselves?

"under the control of a man who had no qualms about using chemical weapons against his own people at Halabja, let alone against foreigners"

Luke fails to mention that Saddam Hussein was a western ally at the time! I wonder why that is?

I notice that Luke makes no mention whatsoever of the systematic torture of Iraqis by the Americans at Abu Ghraib.

No mention of the plunder of Iraqi oil wealth is mentioned---the real reason for the war.

The casualty figures for Iraqi civilians also just happen to be the lowest figures available (and not necessarily the most credible).

Whilst we are on the subject of chemical weapons, it is worth bearing in mind that José Maurício Bustani was removed from his position as head of the OPCW, which governs the Chemical Weapons Convention, following a campaign orchestrated by the Bush administration.

Why was he removed? He was trying to get Iraq to sign up to the Chemical Weapons Convention and that would have meant the verified destruction of any chemical weapons that Iraq may have had.
An excuse for war would have been removed.

Luke's article clearly shows that there will always be people who seek to defend the indefensible.

11:49 am, September 17, 2011


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Free Hit Counters
OfficeDepot Discount