Pyramid Comment

This journal takes an alternative view on current affairs and other subjects. The approach is likely to be contentious and is arguably speculative. The content of any article is also a reminder of the status of those affairs at that date. All comments have been disabled. Any and all unsolicited or unauthorised links are absolutely disavowed.

Friday, March 30, 2007

Blair, Bush, Hypocrisy, Iran and Iraq

Hypocrisy rules, but is, of course, better known as spin.

"Blair and Bush vent anger at
Iran's TV footage of hostages"

screams the Independent (29.03.07). The situation that caused the arrest of service people alleged to be in Iran's territorial waters (as though even Iraqi waters are friendly) was brought about illegally. The case for war was elevated and was, allegedly, based on lies. To take a nation to war on such a suspect premise is an absolute betrayal of the duty of a prime minister. The duty is to protect the citizens of the UQ (aka UK) and not to endanger them.

Responsibilty for all the deaths that followed is down to two individuals and the British prime minister is one of them. But to vent anger at the 'enemy'. The arrogance in that statement is absolutely mindblowing, but not particularly surprising. In character, actually.

To insist on diplomacy being the right way shows weakness in the face of a potential attack. This is similar to talking your way out of a nasty situation. Possible, but almost certainly improbable to be successful. Makes me think of appeasement. Roll over and show how vulnerable you are. 'Belly up'.

This is all about the 'aggressors' saving face: Blair and Bush. That's what is seen. Iraq seemed an easy target. A pushover. All this use of terms like WMD. The justification. It really enabled a close examination and assessment of potential defences before an attack. Once that was done and defences were determined as inadequate to withstand the combined onslaught of the UQ and the US, the attack began.

Mass murder of defencless civilians had been approved.

I am not condoning the Iraqi 'leadership's' treatment of its people. Far from it. As a repressive regime it was one of the worst and this is from commentary by Iraqis living in that regime.

Newspapers and TV-studio discussions are not to be trusted. There is too much potential for influence and distortion to be brought to bear.

The background of oil must not be underestimated as being the prime reason for Bush wanting to be there. As an 'oilman', the prize is just too fabulous. Send men and women to their death. Conscience is absent. Oil is a blinding entity. Something to be worshipped. Honoured. Liquid black gold is seen as simply gold.

A finite resourse and essentially captured in full. The exploitation of a non-replaceable resource.

So, the illusion is of creating wealth. It's not creation, but, in this instance, conversion of liquid black gold into a solid form. Asset stripping. Resourse laundering. Essentially synonymous.

But there the illusion stops. Gold cannot be created. Is alchemy possible?

King Midas.

Power begets control and together they marry to create wealth. Wealth and power. That means control. Societies everywhere play the same game. A very lethal game.

So, was Iraq a relative pushover? No society can be regarded as that. Iran is a logistical problem, but the Americans are 'legitimately' in the area. Long-term planning demonstrates that Iran could have been the real target all along.

And Saudi Arabia is just another country.

But it has the largest reserves of oil in the world.