This morning on the Today programme John Simpson gave us an almost upbeat report on Iraq’s prospects:
‘Iraq’s future is starting to look brighter – if only its people were allowed a little peace.
So does this mean the invasion was justified? Iraqis are divided about it. Shias and Kurds, the big beneficiaries from Saddam’s overthrow, tend to agree. Most Sunnis, the big losers from it, do not.’
Sunnis of course being the beneficiaries of Saddam’s generosity…and the minority which ruled with a fist of iron.
Simpson finished by saying that Iraq could have a bright future if only people realised that that the glass was half full….it might be time to ‘turn the page’.
Curiously the BBC website on their frontpage has chosen to miss out most of the optimistic stuff in this selection of edits from John Simpson which paints an altogether bleaker picture of Iraq….Iraq is no better…there is no future in this country etc.
When the Iraqis have people at the BBC who do everything they can to make out Iraq is a basket case beset by violence then the country and its people will continue to struggle to pull themselves out of the mire as people who might be willing to help are put off and confidence in the country ebbs away.
BBC minions playing politics with Iraqi lives should perhaps listen to John Simpson and keep their noses out….or at least tell the truth…hard to do I know, give it a go, some Iraqi child might live to tell the tale.
I was listening to 5 Live this morning and the reporter said that the citizens of Iraq view the Saddam regime as ‘nostalgic’. Say’s it all.
My main complaint is the limits of the framed argument. If people are arguing that the Iraq invasion was a disaster then by extension they are endorsing tyranny – Saddam’s regime.
So in a brutal world it may be better to work with tyrants for the greater good, i.e. stability, and accepting some will suffer.
However, I understand that The Moral Maze will be looking at whether Britain should be working/trading with unpleasant regimes, Saudi Arabia was mentioned. I wonder if the liberal/socialists who will undoubtedly demand that Britain will be pressed to distraction to even just consider the conundrum. And in so at least deflating their moral unconstitutionality which they wave in front of everyone else.
Michael Beurk may do this, but I seldom hear this point every raised with run-of-the-mill-‘peace’-activists on the BBC.
Though I admit my interaction with The Quisling Broadcasting Corporation is not comprehensive.
‘moral unconditionality’