Friday, March 28, 2003

Yet more on the massacre:

  1. The best story of the day concerns the distribution of food and water humanitarian aid at Basra. The Americans and British wanted to make the distribution into a photo op, showing grateful Iraqis receiving life-giving sustenance from the blessed crusaders (these photo ops are intended to humiliate the Iraqis, and the Iraqis understand this). Unfortunately, the people of Basra refused to play along, and in fact seemed angry. What caused these ingrates to treat the wonderful American and British liberators so shamefully? Well, there are two problems in Basra. The water system has been rendered inoperative for a number of days thanks to 'coalition' bombing destruction of the electrical supply, causing the people of Basra to actually travel outside of the city in a desperate search for water. The problem is not helped by the fact that the liberators have insufficient bottled water. The second problem, and this is the hilarious one, has to do with food and medicine. I quote the excellent Russian analysis:

    "During the past seven days of the war the US Navy detained all ships in the Persian Gulf going to Iraq under the US 'Oil for Food' program. Since yesterday all these ships are being unloaded in Kuwait. Unloaded food is being delivered by the US military to Iraq and is being distributed as 'American humanitarian aid' and as a part of the 'rebuilding Iraq' program"

    The people of Basra were being supplied with aid under the 'oil-for-food' program of the United Nations. What the 'coalition' did, presumably in order to soften up the resistance of the people of Basra, was to blockade this aid for a week. Then, and this is the good part, when they wanted a photo op, they released the same aid, but labelled as coming from Kuwait. So the Iraqis could see they were being offered humanitarian aid by their liberators that was the same food and medicne that these liberators had intentionally deprived them of for a week. No wonder they were't so grateful.

  2. Remember how the British said that the Iraqis in Basra were violently attacking the Saddam forces in Basra in a popular uprising? A lie (the British are now saying it was 'largely exaggerated', which is a bit rich seeing as it was their story). Could the British have created the story to cover up their own atrocities? Or was it just seeing what they had convinced themselves they would see?

  3. Remember when Tony Blair alleged that Iraqi soldiers had executed two British prisoners or war? Guess what? Another lie, or at least a fabulation with no 'absolute evidence'.

  4. The Guardian has an excellent summary of some of the many lies told about the 'war' (see also here).

  5. Robert Fisk continues to embarrass his embedded 'journalist' colleagues by showing how real war reporting is done. He has excellent comments on how Basra is still outside British control, notwithstanding the violent war crimes committed by the British in bombing the people of Basra.

  6. John Negroponte, the American ambassador to the United Nations, walked out of the United Nations debate on the Iraqi massacre after Iraq's ambassador accused the United States of trying to exterminate the Iraqi people. Of course, Negroponte is perfectly correct. The United States does not want to exterminate the Iraqi people. It wants to keep them alive to work as slaves in the American- and Israeli-owned businesses it intends to set up after the massacre is over. These foul slanders against the humanitarian Americans must stop.

  7. Iraq is claiming that nearly 700 American and British troops have been killed in the past seven days of fighting. The Americans are admitting to about a twentieth of that. So there are either a lot of dead British soldiers lying around, or someone is lying. I wonder who is closer to the truth.

  8. Tam Dalyell, a man who has served as a Labour Member of Parliament for 41 (!) years, has written that Tony Blair "should be branded as a war criminal and sent to The Hague." I fully believe that this will happen someday (but British courts should be able to handle it). The whole article is worth reading.

  9. The Russians are still providing the best war analysis. Note that the 'coalition' may be making strategic mistakes. The British have still not secured Basra, and the supposedly already surrendered Iraqi 51st Infantry Division is still fighting. Also note:

    "Information coming from northern regions of Iraq indicates that most of the Kurdish leaders chose not to participate in the US war against Iraq. The primary reason for that is the mistrust of the Kurds toward the US."

    I might add, a justified mistrust, as the Americans are almost certainly going to betray the Kurds in favor of the Turks.