Sunday, 1 September 2013

Humanitarian Bombing

Oxymoron: a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction eg Humanitarian Bombing

Listening to the torrent of outrage outpouring from various nabobs and Bufton-Tuftons it would be an easy assumption to make that the end of the world is nigh. And why would that be? What is it that has set these bellicose buffoons a-spluttering and a-harrumphing across the media ?

The vote not to attack Syria.

For some discreetly paid corporate whores, (Howard, Reid et al) who sit on the boards of arms and security companies, they represent the anguish of their masters who see the gravy train leaving without them on board. For others, physically challenged by the dimensions of their ‘one-eyed trouser snake,’ they feel their very manhood is threatened. Then there are those who physically inhabit the 21st century yet mentally reside in the 19th.

Why are such antiques given such prominence on the nation’s airwaves? 

Anyone who has ever travelled far enough from Britain to rely on BBC World for their daily fix will appreciate that the daily doings of the UK figure infrequently on the world stage. All this guff about us losing our position in the world is just that, guff. 

A country ranked 19th in the U.N. Human Development Index yet spends the fourth largest amount on its military every year is clearly out of sync with itself. The vested interests, those who benefit from the military spending, will not go quietly (see below).

And so we come to ‘Humanitarian Bombing.’ A concept that fair boggles the mind. To help the Syrian people overcome the trauma of being attacked with chemical weapons we will attack them with conventional weapons. To help the Syrian people trapped between the brutality of their ruling tyranny and the barbarity of many of the disparate rebel groups, we will help bring order to the area by launching a wave of air attacks. 

One of the chief advocates of this lunacy is little Willy Hague. He has had a bad few days with his tub-thumping bellicosity. He is currently trying to deflect the justifiable negative attention he is getting onto Miliband in the hope that people will forget exactly how bad (and mad) he has been.

What a tosser.

Unfortunately he is not alone. Consider this from Craig Murray about news coverage last Thursday.

Having sat through 25 minutes of intensive propaganda for bombing Syria called the BBC Ten O’clock News – which did not feature a single interviewee against bombing – it was delightful to see them have to report at the end that the Commons has now rejected the Government’s motion to authorise military action.

It will, Nick Robinson quickly assured us, take a few days to work out what this vote means.  He means it will take a few days for those who profit from war to work out how to spin the vote against military action as a vote for military action.  That process will start in the next few minutes.”

You have been warned.

No comments:

Post a Comment