Hello McCarthy

[sombrefan]

There was an interesting piece in today's Guardian about the growing intolerance to anti-war protestors in America.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,922632,00.html

Meanwhile salon.com continues to address the war with it's usual brilliant articles. What I like about it, is that some of its columnists are not afraid to attack the left. Much as I like the left, sometimes they really get up my nose with their sanctimous 'holier than thou' twaddle. Still anything is better than those neo-conservatives lunatics running the show at the minute. I never thought I'd said but I miss the days of George Bush Sr and John Major.

And finally.

How the war is reported by TV stations from different countries.

http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,922678,00.html

And finally finally

What you wont see in the Sun (the UK's biggest selling tabloid and most pro-war paper)

http://media.guardian.co.uk/iraqandthemedia/story/0,12823,921111,00.html

I wonder if anyone else like me thought that this would be a quick war. The pysch-ops campaign and trying to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people does not seem to be working. I know its still early on in the conflict, but some one somewhere at the highest level must be wondering if they made a mistake. But there's no doubt the coalition forces will win the war but keeping the peace may be a different story indeed. I somehow doubt that the Iraqi people will approve of a US military commander running their country in the short term.

It's not the best analogy but I wonder if Iraq will become America's Northern Ireland?

Comments

I reserve my right to disagree with the first article

[iamdigitalis.livejournal.com]

In a strongly anti-war city, I feel as though that I can't express my support for it.

I think that confirms the point more than anything else.

[thecuckoo.livejournal.com]

You live in an area with a lot of anti-war sentiment (although I do believe that the recent "boycott" of French wines took place in your fair city), and feel pressured not to express your views.

So isn't is just as reasonable to argue that people in areas with a lot of pro-war sentiment would be putting on just as much pressure for those who don't agree with them?

The article may be biased, but that doesn't make it false.

Interesting articles

[lisaslobe.livejournal.com]

I think that the reason that many people expected a quick end to the war is because people believed that more Iraqis would willingly surrender. Those expectations may have been, perhaps, a little short-sighted because we forgot to consider a "devil you know is better than the devil you don't" scenario. Saddam Hussein was awful to his people, but considering what many people in Iraq have probably heard about America (and taking into account the fact that we were an invading army), the Iraqi people have been more inclined to fight for their country than people may have expected.

I also think that, while we may win the war relatively quickly, it's going to be a hundred times more difficult to keep any semblance of "peace".

I said this somewhere else...

[anthonyzisa.livejournal.com]

But we're finding out in America that patriotism can surprise you every now and again. In the wake of 9/11, we allowed legislation like the USA Patriot Act (which sees an even more sinister sequel in the works) to pass under the guise of patriotism. Bush's stark words, aimed at not only the world, but his countrymen, "If you're not with us, you're against us," evoke a certain nationalism. After all, who would be against their country?

I think that's what we're seeing in Iraq. I think people who would ordinarily help topple Saddam see the invading force as attacking Iraq, rather than Saddam. People are rallying behind their country.

Patriotism is a dangerous thing. It's one thing to have pride in one's country, or to love the country (and I do love America, which is why it's all the more painful for me to watch the world reaction against a country I love, as a result of the actions of an administration I don't), but it's quite enough to allow it to muddy the discourse to the degree we've thusfar allowed in the United States. To disagree with the president is being associated with treason, even by some of the American cable news channels *coughFoxNewscough*, and it's rather sickening.

--acz