The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
In searching for evidence of the potential danger posed by Iraq, the Bush Administration need have looked no further than the well-kept record of U.S. manipulation of the sanctions program since 1991. If any international act in the last decade is sure to generate enduring bitterness toward the United States, it is the epidemic suffering needlessly visited on Iraqis via U.S. fiat inside the United Nations Security Council. Within that body, the United States has consistently thwarted Iraq from satisfying its most basic humanitarian needs, using sanctions as nothing less than a deadly weapon, and, despite recent reforms, continuing to do so. Invoking security concerns--including those not corroborated by U.N. weapons inspectors--U.S. policymakers have effectively turned a program of international governance into a legitimized act of mass slaughter.
I just can't stand the sight of his satisfied grin on TV.
This ties in with a lot of hints that Blair is really just another off-the-peg authoritarian. Possibly what happened in the early years was that he was nestled within the bosom of Labour and his colleagues were allowed to pursue traditional Labour policy - at least up to a point.
Gradually those with irritating old-fashioned ethical beliefs were forced out, for one reason or another.
Then came Iraq, most of the remaining traditionalists resigned. Blair remained as the sole driver, with no moderating influences, surrounded by a collection of yes-people and authoritarian religious types who share his real views.
It's been a very quiet coup. Labour grassroots have deserted, literally in their millions, and what's left of the old party now is just a twitching corpse stifling an urge to turn up in public in a bishop's hat, and fingering a rosary.
Not only was it very enlightening, it also answered a question of mine. Quite some time ago I picked up a translation (and a good one, with lots of explanatory footnotes) of the Koran, and read quite a bit (a quarter perhaps). Anyway in some parapragh were it is stated that you should respect other people of the book, Jews, Christians and Sabeans were listed as those people. Finally I have the answer to that nagging question "who were the Sabeans?".
And so I find that they question was posed in the wrong tense, but tragically looks like it will be in the right tense soon.
Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by Oui - Jul 18 25 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 16 5 comments
by ATinNM - Jul 13 25 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jul 15 5 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jul 14 1 comment
by Oui - Jul 12 24 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jul 9 27 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 7 39 comments
by Oui - Jul 201 comment
by Oui - Jul 1825 comments
by Oui - Jul 184 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 165 comments
by ATinNM - Jul 158 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jul 155 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jul 141 comment
by ATinNM - Jul 1325 comments
by Oui - Jul 1315 comments
by Oui - Jul 1224 comments
by Oui - Jul 11
by Oui - Jul 103 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jul 927 comments
by gmoke - Jul 9
by Oui - Jul 81 comment
by Oui - Jul 84 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 739 comments
by Oui - Jul 234 comments
by Oui - Jun 309 comments
by fjallstrom - Jun 2520 comments