Saturday, June 09, 2007

Media enable Bush and Romney to rewrite Iraq-war history
...the reality is that Hussein did open up his country through the fall and winter of 2002-03, giving Hans Blix and his U.N. inspection team free rein to check out suspected WMD sites. It was President Bush who forced the U.N. inspectors out in March 2003 so his invasion could proceed.

To have challenged George W. Bush in July 2003 – when he was near the height of his popularity and to do so in a way that might be interpreted as defending Saddam Hussein – would have looked like career suicide to many American reporters.

It was the smarter choice to stay silent and avoid certain punishment from Bush’s defenders.

Clever journalists know that it’s much safer to bash someone like, say, Al Gore. There’s virtually no career downside to do that.
Putin offers alternatives on missile defence
I don’t like his compromise of having American missiles in Iraq of course but understand that compromise happens in this game, and the idea of Russia sharing in the area’s defence makes sense (as well as blunts American neocons’ naked imperial ambitions since 9/11 Changed Everything™). Of course this plan is acceptable to the Russians whilst American missiles and fire-control radar in their ‘near abroad’ of Poland and the Czech Republic are not. (How would Mr Bush feel about Russian missiles in Cuba like in 1962, or Mexico?) Why do I get the feeling he’ll be snubbed like Woodrow Wilson did to Pope Benedict XV and Austrian Emperor Charles I with his peace plan, or the British and other allies did to the German resistance who wanted to get rid of Hitler and have an armistice, a conditional surrender?

Israel offers Golan to Syria in exchange for cutting Iran ties

From antiwar.com.

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment