"waiting for the end"
posted by k
I suppose we've been waiting for the next war - or the next extension of this war - for some time. It was implicit in the phrase "axis of terror". The main question, for some time, was which country the United States (and probably Britain) would attack next.
Lately, it's been narrowing down to Iran, although for a short while Syria looked the more likely target. One morning last week I heard ex-MP Lorna Fitzsimons telling the world that Iran would be able to launch a nuclear attack in 9-11 months, which sounds a little more reasonable than 45 minutes but still some way from most expert views. So far as I could follow her argument, she was responding to - and opposing - a call for diplomacy to prevent war. She was speaking, so far as I could gather, as chief executive of the Britain-Israel Communications and Research Centre. Those calling for greater diplomacy included Oxfam, various trades unions, Christian churches and Sir Richard Dalton who, until last year, was British Ambassador to Iran.
Now another ground for war has been offered. At a rather surprising press conference, "senior defence officials" from the U.S. have accused Iran's government of supplying particularly sophisticated roadside bombs to "insurgents". It must have been an odd occasion. No cameras were allowed. The journalists were not allowed to identify the officials making the assertions. No evidence was offered and journalists were told that there was no independent verifcation of the U.S. claims. But the anonymous officials also offered some detailed statistics on how many U.S. personnel (they weren't bothered with non-U.S. people) had been injured or killed.
There's no easy way to respond to assertions made by anonymous individuals with no evidence provided. It's hard to trust evidence in any case after the unrelaible dossiers provided to support the invasion of Iraq.
It looks as though we're being prepared for war - and no-one's asking our opinion. There's an anti-war march in London on Saturday, 24th February. How many wars will it have to oppose?
I suppose we've been waiting for the next war - or the next extension of this war - for some time. It was implicit in the phrase "axis of terror". The main question, for some time, was which country the United States (and probably Britain) would attack next.
Lately, it's been narrowing down to Iran, although for a short while Syria looked the more likely target. One morning last week I heard ex-MP Lorna Fitzsimons telling the world that Iran would be able to launch a nuclear attack in 9-11 months, which sounds a little more reasonable than 45 minutes but still some way from most expert views. So far as I could follow her argument, she was responding to - and opposing - a call for diplomacy to prevent war. She was speaking, so far as I could gather, as chief executive of the Britain-Israel Communications and Research Centre. Those calling for greater diplomacy included Oxfam, various trades unions, Christian churches and Sir Richard Dalton who, until last year, was British Ambassador to Iran.
Now another ground for war has been offered. At a rather surprising press conference, "senior defence officials" from the U.S. have accused Iran's government of supplying particularly sophisticated roadside bombs to "insurgents". It must have been an odd occasion. No cameras were allowed. The journalists were not allowed to identify the officials making the assertions. No evidence was offered and journalists were told that there was no independent verifcation of the U.S. claims. But the anonymous officials also offered some detailed statistics on how many U.S. personnel (they weren't bothered with non-U.S. people) had been injured or killed.
There's no easy way to respond to assertions made by anonymous individuals with no evidence provided. It's hard to trust evidence in any case after the unrelaible dossiers provided to support the invasion of Iraq.
It looks as though we're being prepared for war - and no-one's asking our opinion. There's an anti-war march in London on Saturday, 24th February. How many wars will it have to oppose?
posted by areopagitica at 2:29 pm
1 Comments:
Saw this article and wondered, just wondered whether they stupid enough to attempt to hit N.Korea at the same time.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6351067.stm
Post a Comment
<< Home