Month: March 2003

Noted independent journalist Robert Fisk got to see some unedited videotape shot by Al-Djazaira of Basra, which is supposedly captured and held by British forces.

It is also proof that Basra — reportedly “captured” and “secured” by British troops last week — is indeed under the control of Saddam Hussein’s forces. Despite claims by British officers that some form of uprising has broken out in Basra, cars and buses continue to move through the streets while Iraqis queue patiently for gas bottles as they are unloaded from a government truck. A remarkable part of the tape shows fireballs blooming over western Basra and the explosion of incoming — and presumably British — shells. The short sequence of the dead British soldiers for the public showing of which Tony Blair expressed such horror yesterday is little different from dozens of similar clips of dead Iraqi soldiers shown on British television over the past 12 years, pictures which never drew any expressions of condemnation from the British prime minister. The two Britons, still in uniform, are lying on a roadway, arms and legs apart, one of them apparently hit in the head, the other shot in the chest and abdomen.

The rest of the article is extremely disturbing, as he describes the scenes of warfare caputured on the tape — scenes that not only would definitely not be broadcast in the U.S., but would most likely not even be talked about either. But then, it’s also the reality of what is happening on the other side of the world. Not the video-game-on-tv shots of explosions mushrooming up from miles away, but the street-level violence of urban warfare that we now find ourselves in as our armies penetrate further into Iraq.

From Dave Winer:

Presidential candidate Howard Dean gave a talk at Harvard last night. He asked an interesting question. Next year, how will we feel when China invades Taiwan because they think they have weapons of mass destruction? Has the new Bush Doctrine, pre-emptive wars, unleashed a philosophy of world power that we may not be so comfortable with?

Not a happy thought, is it? My guess, if a situation like this were to happen while Bush was in power, would be that we would then start rattling our sabres at China for “invading a soverign nation”. You see, as we’ve amply demonstrated in the past few weeks, when anyone else in the world attacks another country, it’s invasion. When we do it, it’s liberation.

Of course, it’s been pointed out by many people that many of the same arguments used to justify the attack on Iraq could be applied to the U.S. We have a leader in power who was not elected by the popular vote. We have weapons of mass destruction that we’re not willing to destroy. We have chemical weapons (hell, we sold Iraq theirs). We are denying (some of) our citizens their constitutional rights (especially if they’re of middle eastern heritage). So why aren’t we facing U.N. sanctions or a coalition of countries using military force to liberate the American people?

Who knows — maybe we will at some point in the future. As Dean is pointing out, Bush has just made that an acceptable foreign policy for the nations of the world to take.