April 22, 2004

NONE SO BLIND

Robert Fisk turned up on Compulsory Australian Pay TV the other night. An editorial in The Australian responds to the Great Roberto's comments:

Fisk lauded the rag-bag of extremists and terrorists making trouble in Iraq as an "anti-American resistance". Unchallenged, he pointedly referred to the four US contractors brutally murdered in Fallujah as "mercenaries". He nonsensically compared the occupation of Iraq with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - because they are both about "two occupying forces coming up against unstoppable opposition" - and in a stunning piece of moral relativism equated both with the French occupation of Algeria. It seems the US, which has precious little history of empire-building, cannot even remain in a country long enough to set up a democracy without facing the same old accusations of imperialism.

Fisk's local soul-mates have taken The Australian to task for editorialising triumphantly on the fall of Saddam, and for debunking those who claimed Iraq would turn into a quagmire and an intifada. For the record, it was claims the invasion would take months or years, and cost hundreds of thousands of lives, that we debunked. And equally for the record, our opinion page has carried a wider range of anti-war material than rival papers. Our editorial the day after Saddam's statue toppled began "Now for the hard part", and three days later we warned that a "period of disorder" in Iraq was inevitable. It is true we did not get everything right. Neither has the US administration in Iraq, which has chopped and changed far too often, and left it too late to tell the world what sort of government will assume authority on June 30. But the noise of bombs and curfew sirens has only muffled, not stilled, the other sounds we were already hearing in Iraq: of people saying and writing whatever they pleased in 250 new newspapers and magazines, of the satellite televisions that a third of Iraqi households now own, and of oil flowing again at pre-war levels, generating nearly $20 billion this year alone for the Iraqi people. Meanwhile the predicted eruption of the "Arab street" has not eventuated, and countries such as Iran, Libya and even Saudi Arabia have become more biddable than before, both towards the West and towards internal democratic elements. The wheel's still in spin, and nobody should be celebrating anything just yet, but we remain proud of what this country and its allies have done in Iraq.

One highlight from Fisk’s ABC interview:

I cannot see the end, or the depth, to which the current bloodshed is going. I can't see a way out at the moment.

This from a man who couldn’t see how coalition troops would be able to take Baghdad.

Posted by Tim Blair at April 22, 2004 03:19 AM
Comments

I'm heartened. Fisk is so consistently wrong things must be going better than I thought.

Posted by: JorgXMcKie at April 22, 2004 at 03:52 AM

I watched this interview and, of course, what the ABC transcript can't convey is the absolute fury that seethed out of this pathetic little man as he squirmed and jumped and grimaced, unable to contain his sea of triumphant rage at our impending doom.

Now while this was a distubing use of my 8 cents, everyone expects this of Robert Fisk (may sweet UN food for oil blessings rain upon him). What REALLY annoyed me was the absence of any sane alternative view. Where was Andrew Bolt with a large stick?? And WHY was Tony Jones' in "gee you are so alternacool, can I fap you" mode with his nodding and fairy floss questioning?

Bah humbug. Big smackyhand to Lateline.

Posted by: mb at April 22, 2004 at 03:59 AM

Please go to Iraq and take a shoulder-mounted boom microphone with you and point it at the Marines to get their reaction to your drivel.

Posted by: BC at April 22, 2004 at 05:07 AM

In response to the article:
"Fisk lauded the rag-bag of extremists and terrorists making trouble in Iraq as an "anti-American resistance". Unchallenged, he pointedly referred to the four US contractors brutally murdered in Fallujah as "mercenaries"."

They were mercenaries. Their employer- Blackwater Consulting- takes it's core personnel from the US Special Ops community. These guys who died were very likely to be highly trained killer/operators providing guard services to the US military. (the US Govt. being one of their clients). There deployment in Iraq allows the US Govt. to reallocate their own soldiers elsewhere.


"He nonsensically compared the occupation of Iraq with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - because they are both about "two occupying forces coming up against unstoppable opposition" - and in a stunning piece of moral relativism equated both with the French occupation of Algeria. It seems the US, which has precious little history of empire-building, cannot even remain in a country long enough to set up a democracy without facing the same old accusations of imperialism."

--I agree, the US has precious little empire building history in the region- but it is learning fast, very fast.

Coupled with the US support of various regimes brutal regimes in the past and present,(the Shah of Iran, Saddam, Israel), it's involvement in restoring the Kuwaiti dictatorship in '91, Iraq's strategic importance in terms of oil and location -you can see why people 'think' of a new US imperialism.

Remaking a country with a foreign 'influenced' model of governance by force with local puppet support is one aspect of 'imperialism'.

Old style 'imperialism' is dead so in that context, it is not a word I like using.

"Meanwhile the predicted eruption of the "Arab street" has not eventuated, and countries such as Iran, Libya and even Saudi Arabia have become more biddable than before,"


--The Libyan negotiations began many, many months before the Iraq action. Furthermore, progress with Libya only proves that the UK/US is able to welcome back a proven international terrorist regime back into the fold to further US/UK economic interest. As one Libyan minister put it - "we bought peace".

"but we remain proud of what this country and its allies have done in Iraq."

-- Sure, proud of over 10,000 civilians dead? Proud that the civil service administration collapsed?
Proud that a surrender agreement was not signed by a single regime general?
Proud that millions of ordinary Iraqis welcome attacks on US forces? (In a recent poll.)

Remember, Iraq's still not a proven concept, because the people's resistance to occupation is now bolder than it was. Townsfolk are reporting a huge rise in people willing fight the US. If the resistance was a minority problem before, it isn't now.

This is what we said all along. And in a way the Americans have really shot themselves in the foot in post-war Iraq. The very people that were needed to stabilise the country, technocrats, civil servants, administrators, army soldiers, were all summarily sacked in the opening days of US rule. The US foolishly thought that they were destroying Baathist influence.

What they have in fact done is disenfranchised an important sector of society, the sunnis and therefore made normalisation so much more harder.
You think the Sunnis came with Saddam?
They ruled for many centuries; you can't sack them in 3 days! You should understand the history of the region, guys!

In addition, an indeginous army and security force would have been so much more effective at suppressing criminal activities due to their local knowledge and network of informants.

This was a key mistake made by the US and they are now paying for it, because step by step, the actions of America are creating a new breed of resistance against the occupation.

Posted by: rhactive at April 22, 2004 at 07:15 AM

Yeah Rhactive, the indigenous army and police had lots of practice suppressing local "criminal" activities, just ask the Kurds and the Shi'ia. In the case of Saddam's tyranny, the criminals were the government.

Posted by: Michael Lonie at April 22, 2004 at 08:40 AM

> They were mercenaries. Their employer- Blackwater Consulting- takes it's core personnel from the US Special Ops community.

Are you saying hat everyone who has worked as a soldier is a mercenary there after? (and therefore a "legitimate" target) You dont just have to demonstrate that they "could have made good mercenaries" as you implied above, you have to show they WERE mercenaries. Particularly if you are trying to use it to excuse their murder.

> There deployment in Iraq allows the US Govt. to reallocate their own soldiers elsewhere.

The deployment of the UN allows the US govt to deploy its troups elsewhere as does the deployment of some aid workers - are all these people therefore mercenaries?

> it's involvement in restoring the Kuwaiti dictatorship in '91

It sounds like you wanted the US to overthrow the Kuwaiti government and not the Iraqis? Way to punish the victim. Actually you are just abandoning any moral position in order to attack the USA.

> Furthermore, progress with Libya only proves that the UK/US is able to welcome back a proven international terrorist regime back into the fold

Again a double standard in order to attack the USA. Lybia is co-operating with the international comunity. If you were to oppose them for doing that there would be no incentive at all to cooperate. Lybia has been sidelined for decades if they are willing to cooperate then that is punishment enough.

> Sure, proud of over 10,000 civilians dead?

The funny thing is it seems to be you who is proud of 10,000 people dead getting cheap thrills from the deaths of iraqis since it supports your world view of the USA, ignoring those that sadam killed because it doesn't.

> The US foolishly thought that they were destroying Baathist influence.

This is what happens in a society made up of many factions. The US was initially critisized for leaving too many of hte old peopel in power then it is critisized for leaving too few. there is no winning because there are segments of society that are diametrically opposed.

> In addition, an indeginous army and security force would have been so much more effective.

This of course would be the pathway to setting up a puppet reigme. And is how it would have been done if that was indeed the aim.

Posted by: Scottie at April 22, 2004 at 08:42 AM

I think its hilarious that some people still doubt the capability and strength of the United States military... I mean, they use robots for shit sake. Robots!

Posted by: Oktober at April 22, 2004 at 09:00 AM

rhactive - The definition of a mercenary is a foreigner hired to wage war. America is fighting this war, the contractors were Americans, therefore they aren't mercenaries.

Posted by: Matt Moore at April 22, 2004 at 09:06 AM

Rhactive: "Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah."

Whatever, loser.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at April 22, 2004 at 09:22 AM

I'd be curious to know the maximum number of unintentional deaths Mr. Rhactive would accept from a nation proud of its performance in a war. 1? 100? 1,000? And where the heck did that "10,000" come from, anyway?

The U.S. forces did not go around massacring civilians, and the number of lives lost is dwarfed by the number that will not be lost thanks to the removal of Hussein & Co. from power. That sounds like something to be damned proud of.

Also, love the "Shah of Iran, Saddam, Israel" progression -- a classic 1-2-3 setup if ever there was one.

Posted by: E. Nough at April 22, 2004 at 11:12 AM

The earlier Fiskism about how america can't take baghdad really is a classic. I agree with Oktober (especially on the robot bit) - how many wars will it take for people to realise that nobody can stand up to the US military in a battle, without resorting to non-conventional weapons (or WMD as they are now known)?
The USAF striking targets, followed up by armoured and mechanised infantry units of the US army, with discreet roles for the US Marine Corp and Special Forces, oh, and chuck in a few carrier battle groups of the US Navy. I mean seriously - that is the definition of an unstoppable force, and there aint no immovable object (i.e. the USSR) anymore.
On the US can lose a war, through mismanagement or loss of public support, no other country can defeat her in one.

Posted by: attila at April 22, 2004 at 11:41 AM

Israel a brutal regime, rhactive? Such a ridiculous statement excuses me from having to read any of your other piffle.

Posted by: slatts at April 22, 2004 at 12:16 PM

Gee these bloodthirsty, greedy mercenaries sure get around. Even the UN is hiring. And from the same companies to boot.

Or are they only mercenaries - with all the baggage that that label entails - if they work in Iraq?

Posted by: bargarz at April 22, 2004 at 12:23 PM

Rhactive: If you could have used one--just one--credible source to back up any bit of your drivel about what "townsfolk" are thinking, I might have cut you some slack. But, alas, you're just another raving member of the Moonbat Brigade.

If we are so good at bending the world to our bidding, why the blazes was my house's heating bill this winter the highest in five years, and gas prices have been rising all through 2004? I guess we're going to have to go stomp Venezuela's Chavez next...he musn't have received our "We own the world's oil" memo.

Posted by: TC-LeatherPenguin at April 22, 2004 at 12:32 PM

How can the tribal divisions in Iraq be so deep that democracy would impossible. But also so close that a civil war between them is also not possible

Posted by: Max at April 22, 2004 at 04:15 PM

Its easy to tell when the Latelne gerbil gets a woody during an interview. His left eye starts blinking like crazy. During the Fisk interview I thought he was going to do an Inspector Gadget and take off. Check it out next time he interviews a moonbat.

Posted by: snoopy at April 22, 2004 at 10:44 PM

Ahhhh...reading those comments made me feel so much better. I sometimes feel like I'm the only person in the world who watches the ABC, particularly Lateline, and as such, I'm the only witness to such atrocities as the Fisk interview. Jones simply provided him with a platform, nothing more. His gibberish about civil war went unchallenged. Thank God for this site and another wonderful site, ABC Watch....sorry I don't know how to add the link! I was right by-the-way in a previous post, that low-life Peter Singer got to flog his miserable book tonight in an extended interview on Lateline. He's on again on Sunday night, this time for an entire hour!

Posted by: Brian. at April 23, 2004 at 02:10 AM

OK Ladies and Gents let's start from the top:

M. Lonie- "Yeah Rhactive, the indigenous army and police had lots of practice suppressing local "criminal" activities, just ask the Kurds and the Shi'ia. In the case of Saddam's tyranny, the criminals were the government."

Kidnapping and gun crime were unheard of in the capital city prior to the US invasion. We're not talking about human rights (where we all know the police were brutal) we are talking about crime !


Furthermore, did you know that Kurds and Shia were also in the Government and security forces (albeit with lesser influence)? Baathists were obsessed with not letting their country come apart and I agree, they brutally executed that policy by papering over cultural differences among it's people.

Despite later the Kurdish autonomy in the north and the muted shia resentment in the south , there were still Kurds and Shia in the Baghdad administration!

Scottie- "Are you saying hat everyone who has worked as a soldier is a mercenary there after? (and therefore a "legitimate" target)"

I never said that. I agree with you. What I said was that These guys at the moment of attack were highly trained killer/operators providing guard services to the US military. (the US Govt. being one of their clients). They are openly and visibly armed in a theatre of combat operations. The mission they were on at the time of the attack remains a mystery- but from the point of the Resistance they were legitimate targets. There was no grain truck in the convoy and they were still military contractors. i.e. Mercenaries.

Scottie- "The deployment of the UN allows the US govt to deploy its troups elsewhere as does the deployment of some aid workers - are all these people therefore mercenaries?"

Again I agree with you. That's not what I said. UN staff report to UN command. Aid workers report to their NGO command. US Military contractors report to the US military command for deployment instructions, that's the key difference - i.e. being armed employees of an occupation force.


Scottie- "It sounds like you wanted the US to overthrow the Kuwaiti government and not the Iraqis? Way to punish the victim. Actually you are just abandoning any moral position in order to attack the USA."

Not at all. I am highlighting the double standards at play. If you can't see it- i'd be surprised. - Restore the Al-Sabah family to their small emirate but remove the Baath party from Iraq. Both are dictatorships.

Scottie- "Again a double standard in order to attack the USA. Lybia is co-operating with the international comunity. If you were to oppose them for doing that there would be no incentive at all to cooperate. Lybia has been sidelined for decades if they are willing to cooperate then that is punishment enough."

First of all the correct spelling is Libya. I am not portraying double standards - I am highlighting the double standards policy of our leaders.

Scottie- "The funny thing is it seems to be you who is proud of 10,000 people dead getting cheap thrills from the deaths of iraqis since it supports your world view of the USA, ignoring those that sadam killed because it doesn't."

The US is creating it's own world view. I am just presenting it in a way you find uncomfortable. How can the would leader of freedom and democracy kill over 10,000 peple to remove a single guy you may think. You think now 10,000 families are not pissed with the US? That's only counting the ones in this campaign!

Scottie- "This is what happens in a society made up of many factions. The US was initially critisized for leaving too many of hte old peopel in power then it is critisized for leaving too few. there is no winning because there are segments of society that are diametrically opposed."

Well for your information the US this morning has admitted it was wrong (i.e. major policy shift). It is reversing the de-Baathification process (to a small extent) and inviting key workers back into Govt. service.

"We are reviewing how the policies are being implemented and looking at how we can better balance the need for expertise and experience that some Iraqis have with the need for justice," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan this morning.

Scottie- "This of course would be the pathway to setting up a puppet reigme. And is how it would have been done if that was indeed the aim. "

But this what is being done anyway. Iraq needs to be policed by Iraqis- most people will agree with me. In fact, the US has also set-up a Iraqi National Intelligence organisation too.

Oktober- "I think its hilarious that some people still doubt the capability and strength of the United States military... I mean, they use robots for shit sake. Robots!"

No-one is doubting, they are doubting the US argument and US legitimacy. And before you get too excited on your high horse- Vietnam was not a success may I remind you.


Matt Moore- "The definition of a mercenary is a foreigner hired to wage war. America is fighting this war, the contractors were Americans, therefore they aren't mercenaries."

Exactly. They were foreign (check), hired (check), in a war (check).

They were private military contractors who will work for anyone within their agreed client list.
Whatever makes you happy Matt. The purpose of Blackwater like any company is to a make a profit; fine- they've made their choice.

Andrea- "Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah."

Andrea you are such a useless poster. What's wrong-no capacity to type your usual snidey comments?


Nough-- "I'd be curious to know the maximum number of unintentional deaths Mr. Rhactive would accept from a nation proud of its performance in a war. 1? 100? 1,000? And where the heck did that "10,000" come from, anyway?"

Unintentional? Oh you mean the bombing of Iraq's military AND civilian infrastructure for the past 13 years was unintentional?

The bombing of specific assets when civilian deaths is expected and accepted - UNINTENTIONAL?

Obsession with force protection at checkpoints-unintentional?

600 killed in 1 town over the past 2 weeks- unintentional?

Get real, wake up and see what CENTCOM are doing in your name.

Source of 10,000? Check http://www.iraqbodycount.net//

Nough- "The U.S. forces did not go around massacring civilians"

They don't have to. Cluster bomblets, DU tank shells, JDAMS, Apaches - they do the same job you know!!

Hussein & Co. replaced by Exile & Co. or Sadr & Co. ? Or maybe not?


Nough- "Also, love the "Shah of Iran, Saddam, Israel" progression -- a classic 1-2-3 setup if ever there was one."

Thanks, YOU can the thank the US taxpayer!


Atilla- "On the US can lose a war, through mismanagement or loss of public support, no other country can defeat her in one."

Militarily nearly correct. But is that the benchmark, pure invasion? Nothing more? Is that why you 'won' Vietnam? Why not just cut the corner and nuke everyone. You have WMD as well.

If your conventional forces were NOT superior, then trust me you would also be looking at use of WMD. (Like in Japan).


Slatts- "Israel a brutal regime, rhactive?"
This is not worth answering.

Bargaz- "Gee these bloodthirsty, greedy mercenaries sure get around. Even the UN is hiring. And from the same companies to boot."

I have no problem with that. Most UN missions are peacekeeping misions.

Bargaz- "Or are they only mercenaries - with all the baggage that that label entails - if they work in Iraq?"

Is Iraq a peacekeeping mission? Are there separate factions desperate to kill each other? More like the people are uniting finally to expell the occupier! Iraq is an occupation mission- the US were not invited to Iraq. Not least by any resident Iraqi faction- only exiles.

Let's remember the Iraqi regime was always brutal. What's changed? US policy towards it?


TC-"Rhactive: If you could have used one--just one--credible source to back up any bit of your drivel about what "townsfolk" are thinking,"

BBC poll on 16th March citing less that 10% tust rate of occupation forces, 50% dissaprove of occupation. Check CNN and Time reports on how people are willing to join resistance.

TC-"If we are so good at bending the world to our bidding, why the blazes was my house's heating bill this winter the highest in five years, and gas prices have been rising all through 2004? I guess we're going to have to go stomp Venezuela's Chavez next...he musn't have received our "We own the world's oil" memo.

Ask your Pres - his family are very close to the House of Saud. So much so that Prince Bandar was briefed even before the British - and he reassured the US that oil prices would be kept under control!

Posted by: rhactive at April 23, 2004 at 09:35 PM