TheNewTopical.com - current events, politics, culture, ethics, economics discussion forum  

Go Back   TheNewTopical.com - current events, politics, culture, ethics, economics discussion forum » Main Forum » Politics

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 28-07-10, 07:53 AM
contracycle's Avatar
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,150
Default Chilcot inquiry: too late, Hans Blix, too late

Chilcot inquiry: too late, Hans Blix, too late

The weapons inspector has spoken out at the Chilcot inquiry. If only he had done so in 2003


o Sami Ramadani
o The Guardian, Wednesday 28 July 2010

With its sedate pace and genteel drip, drip revelations, one could be forgiven for thinking of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war as an academic exercise, delving into some distant historical event in an attempt to understand what happened. But to many Iraqis, the inquiry is something else entirely. It is an inconsequential charade, a classic case of fiddling while Baghdad burns.

Yesterday it was Hans Blix's turn to appear before the laid back and suitably emotionless inquisitors. The former chief UN weapons inspector revealed nothing we didn't know. He told Chilcot there was no justification for war, because his inspectors found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction; and he told them that he had needed a few more months to finish his task.

As an Iraqi living in Britain, and fearful for my compatriots back home, I remember waiting with baited breath for Blix to utter those undiluted words when he appeared before the UN security council in 2003, 11 days before the war of aggression was launched. Back then, he minced his words, providing enough ambiguity for Tony Blair and Jack Straw to push on with their plans to drag Britain into the US-led war.

Like a lot of politicians with guilty consciences, Blix has thrown his weight behind justice and morality only after the fact. The problem is, the Iraq war is not some bygone event. When Blair misled parliament into passing a motion to disarm Iraq of its non-existent WMD he started a chain of events that did not simply winch Saddam and his odious sons from the palaces. The war destroyed a country, and left millions dead, maimed, orphaned or widowed. Its horrific consequences are still being visited upon Iraqis – such as the mothers who are delivering deformed babies because of the chemical weapons used by the invading forces.

But there are other long-term consequences. The Iraqis who Blair and Bush glorified and brought to power through sham elections are bleeding the nation dry through corruption and the sell-off of Iraq's resources to multinationals. Freedom and democracy is nowhere to be seen. Deploying the US-built Iraqi security forces against the people is common. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have drawn attention to the plight of thousands of prisoners, widespread use of torture, and both judicial and extra-judicial killings.

Meanwhile, the litany of repressive policies gets longer. It is illegal to be a member of a trade union, just as it was under Saddam. Paul Bremer, the US envoy who ruled Iraq after the invasion, revived Saddam's infamous "decree 150" in 2004, effectively banning all public sector unions. Activists are now treated as if they were terrorists. Only last week troops and police raided the offices of workers' unions across the country, following a government decree under the 2005 anti-terrorism act, to ban them and seize their assets.

Britain's TUC has described the regime's action as a "Saddam-style move", and its general secretary Brendan Barber has written to the foreign secretary, William Hague, to help stop this "dangerous abuse of power". Dangerous indeed, for the regime has also brought terror-related charges against oil industry trade union leaders. The president of the Federation of Oil Unions, Hasan Juma'a, and several other union leaders have been charged with contacting the media, sabotaging the economy and high treason. Juma'a believes that the regime is trying to "liquidate" the unions while transferring Iraq's oil wealth to the multinationals.

Having auctioned Iraq's oil wealth, the oil minister Hussain al-Shahristani was recently given the electricity portfolio after mass protests against lack of electricity supplies and regime corruption. Troops opened fire on the demonstrators while the prime minister described them as "hooligans" and deployed troops in Baghdad to stop the protests – dubbed by Iraqis as the "electricity uprising" – spreading to the capital.

While Chilcot rumbles on, there is palpable anger across Iraq against the regime's policies and corruption. Anger too at the continued US occupation. Baghdad has the biggest US embassy in the world, from which, many Iraqis believe, the US dictates important regime policies and deepens Iraqi political divisions in order to maintain its control of the country. US aims have changed since the invasion – America wants to steer Iraq's political and economic direction, and use the country as a base against Iran – but most of the Iraqi people still resist this.

What Blix said yesterday was right, of course. But if only he had said it sooner.

Chilcot inquiry: too late, Hans Blix, too late | Sami Ramadani | Comment is free | The Guardian
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 28-07-10, 10:43 AM
Gilles de Rais's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,639
Default

Stop saying all that. LN thinks Iraq has "worked out"... And, of course, so does PMP but he probably sees nothing wrong with banning and torturing union members anyhow.
__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 28-07-10, 12:02 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

Quote:
Yesterday it was Hans Blix's turn to appear before the laid back and suitably emotionless inquisitors.
Would you rather they were overwrought and hysterical?

Quote:
As an Iraqi living in Britain, and fearful for my compatriots back home, I remember waiting with baited breath for Blix to utter those undiluted words when he appeared before the UN security council in 2003, 11 days before the war of aggression was launched. Back then, he minced his words, providing enough ambiguity for Tony Blair and Jack Straw to push on with their plans to drag Britain into the US-led war.
Er... No he didn't. At the time he said that they hadn't found anything and wanted more time.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 28-07-10, 12:28 PM
contracycle's Avatar
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,150
Default

It's not an unfair criticism. I always thought Blix was essentially accepting of the American narrative; while saying he wanted more time, he also reeled of example afrer example of Iraqi obstructionism, which is what the coalition then seized on to claim that inspections weren't working and that force was necessary.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-10, 04:54 AM
insignificant data point
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,799
Default

That's because there was example after example of Iraqi obstructionism. Would you rather that Blix had lied, and pretended that there wasn't?
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-10, 01:12 PM
PostmodernProphet's Avatar
full immersion.....
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,194
Default

Originally Posted by Gilles de Rais View Post
Stop saying all that. LN thinks Iraq has "worked out"... And, of course, so does PMP but he probably sees nothing wrong with banning and torturing union members anyhow.
I will admit it was refreshing to hear someone admit that Blix didn't argue Iraq had no WMD until after the war had begun based upon the common consensus that it did......much more honest than the typical "Bush lied, soldiers died" mantra the left loves to employ.....

as for the rest of the SillyTwit's post, I see no need to torture union members, as they likely know nothing more of the union's plans than is obvious to the rest of us......
__________________
....attached to sanity by a bungee cord.....
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-10, 03:58 PM
Francois Cellier's Avatar
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 3rd planet of Sol
Posts: 2,101
Default

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
much more honest than the typical "Bush lied, soldiers died" mantra the left loves to employ.....
At least, it is poetic: it rhymes. Not much else rhymes as far as the Iraq war is concerned.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-10, 04:56 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
based upon the common consensus that it did......
Well I guess it only needs two people for there to be a consensus, so I can hardly argue with that. Not sure where the "common" is coming from though...
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-10, 05:18 PM
PostmodernProphet's Avatar
full immersion.....
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,194
Default

Originally Posted by Zichao View Post
Well I guess it only needs two people for there to be a consensus, so I can hardly argue with that. Not sure where the "common" is coming from though...
oh come on......there is an extensive litany of the left, from the Clintons on down, stating that Hussein had WMD and needed to be stopped.....all the objections against the war up until months after the beginning of it were centered around the argument that we needed to give him more time to get rid of them, not that he didn't have them......even Plame's hubby, who's name I don't recall, reported that while he hadn't gotten yellow cake from Nigeria, it must have come from somewhere else.....
__________________
....attached to sanity by a bungee cord.....
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 29-07-10, 09:26 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

Even inside the US it's not so clear. The poll results vary wildly from those that suggest that
upwards of 80% of people believed wholeheartedly in the Iraqi WMDs to those that only came back with less than 50%.

In Britain, despite tv coverage that consistently favoured the WMD argument, 30-40% remained unconvinced according to Yougov.

It's harder to get good pre-war polls from other countries (somewhat incredibly, the biggest international survey just presumes that the WMD existed - nice scientific methodolog you got there, Pew) so i think I'll just leave it there. You can pretty much guess what the responses were in any case.

Incidentally, even at the time the French intelligence services were telling anyone who'd care to listen that the whole yellocake story was bollocks from begining to end.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
Reply


(View-All Members who have read this thread : 10
Benjamin, contracycle, Francois Cellier, Gilles de Rais, Noir, PostmodernProphet, roadkill, Zichao
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0