Channel 4 and it's sister channels have become obsessed with Iraq and is promoting itself as some sort of fountain of Knowledge on the subject as far as I can make out.
The country this channel seems so preoccupied with is in the middle of a revolution of sorts. One brought about by a much disputed invasion, The people of Iraq have been given the opportunity to vote for their leader, the first such opportunity in their countries history.
Are they aware for every man women and child killed in the troubles in Iraq at present an extra three are killed in the crime trouble spots in the major cities of Brazil, south Africa and America. For instance over 36,000 people were killed in Brazil last year from gun related violence. If the channels grievance with the situation in Iraq is that it has lead to indiscriminate death, why don't you bring up the death rates and failings of the said Governments of Brazil and South Africa.
Don't they care about the plight of these Forgotten people, or as I suspect are you more concerned, no Obsessed with trying to score cheap points against your sworn enemies in the white house!
"You're nothing but an errand boy sent by grocery clerks to collect the bill"
I missed that program last night on More4 about Iraq, DAMN!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you ooze Masculinity like some of us do, you have no reason to fear Pink...
"There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is ENGLAND." - Sir Winston Churchill
Originally posted by EnglishST: I missed that program last night on More4 about Iraq, DAMN!
" Why we went to War"? It was an excellent programme - I'd have liked just a soupcon more pith. It showed quite clearly that Blair's vanity and ego got him and the country into a situation from which he could not extricate himself. I very much hope it is repeated for anybody that missed it.
I am fed up of hearing about Iraq. It has been on the news forever and is always talked about by the Independent. We went there, its not worked well, we'll try to make it a bit better, we'll leave. End of Story.
Although I will watch Why the Arabs hate the West tonight.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Matt Jarrett: Channel 4 and it's sister channels have become obsessed with Iraq ... QUOTE]
Two wrongs do not make a right. The war in Iraq was clearly wrong and the guilty parties are still benefiting from their crimes. There is no ‘statute of limitations’ that can protect those guilty. Let the victims be heard until justice, reluctant as its keepers might be, is done and seen to be done. E will never forget.
thanks
Alfred
Dr Alfred Vella CMath, CEng alfred_vella@hotmail.com
[Formerly Visiting Professor then Head of Computing then Head of Computing and Information Systems then Associate Dean, Computing Research and Development, The University of Luton, UK]
remember somebody saying the great war we will learn from this, WW2 never again will we allow this to happen. yes the war was wrong because to many of the United nations had big money within Iraq, but Saddam should have been removed a long time ago, Mugabe should also have been removed, it's like Hitler people stood back and said nothing to do with us, then when the Jews and others were being exterminated we will let others sort it out.
The United nations was formed not to allow tin pot dictators, it was the United nation which should have stopped this.
yes war is wrong but bombs do kill, so does a rife to the back of the head while your kneeling on the ground, seems money still speaks and especially oil, but we should have stopped this a long time ago.
Yes if people can be wrong, then wars can be right. Its a shame we end up sacrificing the masses, and as masses we can just hope the war is worthy of such sacrifice.
In this case I fear it is not, but not for the main reasons, more just for consistency as treborn has mentioned.
Saddam did need removing, he should of been removed last time we were there, when the war was a little more justified. In fact why wasnt he, especially as we did encourage many to take up arms against the main party, they did, they were left to it and lost at a massive cost. This is why we end up not trusting the US or the UK, and why we should rely on the UN. Unfortunetly they did let us down, they have before and they will again. We had certain counties fighting the war as unjustified and wrong (often same countries who were doing most trade with Iraq pre war, ie France and Russia), and others who ignored UN totally to remove Saddam(the countries wo now make the money from Iraq).
So yes I can see the war as right in someways, I just dont think our leaders have the right to make these decisions (and not others, China anyone?) based on their obvious bias and resource greed which we all clearly see. Afghan can also be included in this, again yes the Taliban blah blah (again I agree, I dont like the Taliban, dont think they did anything good in Afghanistan, and generally glad they were removed), but did we remove them for the things we all could agree with (and that had been goin gon for years, even the destruction of major religious relics), or did we remove them for the major gas pipeline we all will rely on in the VERY near future.
Again Im not justifying any of it, I dont think we can anymore, and I certainly cant trust Bush, and now Blair as well, to make such decisions, as I see the only correlations as a creation. ie they are looking for such countries to attack, giving (A) as a reason to do so, as the people believe in A, but in fact its over (B), something we all need, but something most of us would not go to war over.
Hard times, untrustworthy leaders.
I do believe in the UN, I just now believe they are failing.
Failed Iraq, failed Bosnia, failed Rwanda and now failing the Sudan too.
But yes couldnt agree more, this should have stopped ages ago, and we cerainly shouldnt be discussing if we can actually trust our own leaders. That we should be able to rely on by now, and we should be working far more as a planet, afterall we face the same issues, regardless of geography, skin colour or sex.
