But one hopes for the sake of the people of Afghanistan..

US President Barack Obama’s reported outreach to “some of Pakistan’s most fervent Islamist and anti-American parties” should probably be seen as an attempt to identify those who, as David Milliband described in relation to Afghanistan, could be “drawn into a political process”. Obama may have declared the war in Afghanistan “a war of necessity” and “a war worth fighting”, but it’s worth remembering that “talking to the Taliban is nothing new.” Whether they can identify, and enlist, suitably inclined capos warlords to be politicians remains to be seen.Drawing too close a parallel with The Process™ here would be unwise but, as threats are made of further violence, I was struck by the admission in this BBC report on tomorrow’s elections in Afghanistan – “No-one is using the age-old electoral mantra ‘free and fair’.”

“Good enough” is a phrase that slipped into conversation after the last parliamentary elections in 2005, amid disappointment over some of the candidates allowed to run and persistent allegations of vote rigging.

In a highly charged political atmosphere, pressure was exerted on irate losers to accept the results and move on. Too much was at stake.

Western officials involved in the process now admit there was “very significant fraud”. In some ballot boxes, neat piles of evenly folded ballots were evidence of stuffing.

A lot is also at stake this time, for Afghans and an international community determined to achieve success.

The question may be “good enough” for whom?

It’s a good question, and one that brings to mind Michael Goldfarb’s argument, noted in a previous post on justice, “The price of conjuring peace out of conflict is that justice is not done; most crimes go unpunished.”

How deeply any of the parties Obama is reaching out to can be enticed into a political process will also likely depend on there being verifiable benefits to those parties.

And such a process will, undoubtedly, take a considerable length of time and the intervention, at times, of more forceful individuals than the current envoys may be able to be at present – as with the intervention of Mitchell Reiss here.

Those parties identified, and enlisted into the process, may also, in time, start to exhibit familiar psychotic tendencies as they walk the political tightrope of former insurgents [or even terrorists].

Other known unknowns would include the role of the media – whether dissenting or well-behaved witnesses to that process – and the political reaction to that media.

But we can probably say that a known known is that the stated objective will differ from the actual destination.

, , , , ,

  • 6countyprod

    “The price of conjuring peace out of conflict is that justice is not done; most crimes go unpunished.”

    Sad though it is, that pretty much sums it up.

    In 2007, with the Bush ‘surge’, and a new anti-insurgent strategy implemented by General Petreaus, coalition forces succeeded in weaning many of the Sunni tribes away from AQ resulting in vastly improved conditions for the Iraqis (today’s horrific events excluded).

    Let’s hope Petreaus can achieve similar results in Afghanistan, although, to be honest, with the Afghan warlords, it’s difficult to imagine.

  • Big Maggie

    “In 2007, with the Bush ‘surge’, and a new anti-insurgent strategy implemented by General Petreaus, coalition forces succeeded in weaning many of the Sunni tribes away from AQ”

    Oh for heaven’s sake! The Iraq war was and is a disaster for all concerned. AQ were not in Iraq at the time of the Coalition invasion; they went in BECAUSE of the invasion. And look at the carnage that ensued.

    “resulting in vastly improved conditions for the Iraqis (today’s horrific events excluded).”

    That will be a comfort to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis mourning their slaughtered kinfolk. Today’s events are nothing new. And it’s all because Bush and his poodle Blair went against the wishes of their peoples to wage a reckless war.

    They’re doing the rubber-chicken circuit now and raking it in. In the meantime Iraq lies bleeding and the entire region has been destabilized.

  • Pete Baker

    Maggie

    I know you’re responding to an element of 6cp’s comment, but if we could try to keep the focus on the actual topic?

  • Big Maggie

    Pete,

    My focus was on ill-considered wars/invasions: Iraq and Afghanistan. The former was a template for the latter.

    You’d think our betters would have learned from the ill-considered Iraq adventure, but no. They had to repeat it. And so we have the war in Afghanistan, which our politicians are claiming is “defence”. Yeah, right. We’re defending the UK by prosecuting a war in Asia.

    Orwell, come back. We need you.

    (I do hope that’s focused enough for your taste.)

  • Pete Baker

    Maggie

    My point was that arguing over whether anyone considers those wars as “ill-considered” is irrelevant at this stage.

    The post, which includes Obama’s latest statement on Afghanistan, is about where the current/emerging strategy is leading to in Afghanistan.

    With considerations of where we have gone, and could go, here.

  • Big Maggie

    Pete,

    Yes, I do appreciate that we’ve moved on somewhat. That said, Obama’s statements—“a war of necessity” and “a war worth fighting”—really get my goat.

    My point was that this was the sort of bullshit we were fed before and during the Iraq war. The present war is going nowhere and will result only in more misery for those caught up in it. The Taliban will not be defeated; they will go underground, only to re-emerge in a new configuration. Such is the nature of the guerrilla beast.

    We shouldn’t be in Afghanistan. By being there we’re simply exacerbating the situation. As was the case in Iraq, change will only come from within. Our incursion will be seen in terms of post-colonial arrogance, and we will be damned for that, to the extent that our towns and cities will be even more vulnerable than they were prior to the war.

  • Pete Baker

    Maggie

    “The Taliban will not be defeated; they will go underground, only to re-emerge in a new configuration. Such is the nature of the guerrilla beast.”

    Like the [Provisional] IRA?

    To refer back to one of the topics..

  • 6countyprod

    To suggest that death and destruction has only appeared in Iraq and Afghanistan since the advent of Bush and Blair is ludicrous in the extreme.

    With recent events in Iraq, the withdrawal of US forces from Iraqi cities might be considered premature, although it is what the Iraqis themselves pushed for, first with Bush and then with Obama. The Americans are willing to return to a more active role, if needed.

    My point was that a new strategy in Afghanistan is obviously needed, and that may be in peeling off some of the less extreme elements within the Taliban. Petreaus seems to be the only man around able to even attempt this.

    If not, then Afghanistan will continue to wallow in the carnage that has benighted it for so many decades.

  • Big Maggie

    Pete,

    “Like the [Provisional] IRA?”

    Yes!

    6countyprod,

    “To suggest that death and destruction has only appeared in Iraq and Afghanistan since the advent of Bush and Blair is ludicrous in the extreme.”

    I agree. Has somebody suggested that?

  • Pete Baker

    6cp

    That might well be your point.

    But it’s not necessarily the topic of the original post.

  • Pete Baker

    “Like the [Provisional] IRA?”

    “Yes!”

    Really Maggie?

    “only to re-emerge in a new configuration. Such is the nature of the guerrilla beast.”?

    I guess we should abandon the current strategy here then, and advise those in Afghanistan likewise..

    Unless you mean that any such a re-emergence will be a lesser incarnation.

    In which case, like here, the current Afghanistan strategy is on the right track.

  • Big Maggie

    Pete,

    “I guess we should abandon the current strategy here then, and advise those in Afghanistan likewise.”

    You naughty boy! I know where you’re headed but I won’t play. No.

    Here is how I view matters both here and abroad. The current peace process in NI is clearly working. I cringed when Paisley and McGuinness gurned their way into my living-room if not my heart. At the same time I was heartened that the little boys had put away their deadly toys and had decided to rejoin the human race as adults.

    Yes, the outside world could take its cue from our wee pravince and attempt a similar cooperation of opposites.

    “Unless you mean that any such a re-emergence will be a lesser incarnation.”

    I have to confess that I haven’t thought it through to quite that extent. I’m only going on the mutations seen in the Latin American model, what one might call the Guevara Effect.

    The fact is that nobody has the slightest inkling about what’s about to happen in Afghanistan. Certainly not in the UK; too far away, too ignorant of that nation’s difficulties. And who can speak the language? John Simpson? English and French; very effective in Kabul and Helmand.

    “In which case, like here, the current Afghanistan strategy is on the right track.”

    I suspect you’re being facetious. But that’s OK.

  • Wilde Rover

    6countyprod,

    “To suggest that death and destruction has only appeared in Iraq and Afghanistan since the advent of Bush and Blair is ludicrous in the extreme.”

    Indeed, this is very true. This is the fourth time the British army has been in Afghanistan to liberate the shit out of the locals, and of course the Americans have been pumping in money and arms into Afghanistan to people like CIA asset Tim Osman, er I mean evil terrorist Osama bin Laden since the 1970s.

    Iraq have been having the shit blown out of them ever since their proxy war against Iran in the 1908s, the war under Bush Sr and, of course, the bombing under Clinton that lead to half a million dead children alone. They had a hell of a time when the British were there in the early twentieth century to try out their new air force too.

    So I totally agree with you 6countyprod.

    “Afghanistan will continue to wallow in the carnage that has benighted it for so many decades.”

    Well, what’s the point of having perpetual war if the war ends? Where’s the profit?

  • 6countyprod

    Silly old me. I forgot, all the problems in the world have been caused by the US and the UK. We would be living in Utopia without these nasty war-mongers, right?

    ‘Free and fair’, ‘Good enough’. Maybe ‘Better than before’, but I wonder, has there ever been an extended period of peace and tranquillity in Afghanistan?

  • 6countyprod

    Here’s an interesting and thoughtful article on the current Afghan situation by Gregg Sheridan in The Australian. The first paragraph starts, ‘Perhaps the most important mistake the Bush administration made after the invasion of Iraq was to …

  • Wilde Rover

    6countyprod,

    “Silly old me. I forgot, all the problems in the world have been caused by the US and the UK.”

    From the point of view of someone from Iraq or Afghanistan, yes, yes they have.

    “We would be living in Utopia without these nasty war-mongers, right?”

    Some other war mongers would take their place, but since you guys love your wars we aren’t likely to find out any time soon, are we?

    “Maybe ‘Better than before’, but I wonder, has there ever been an extended period of peace and tranquillity in Afghanistan?”

    Well, those with imperial aspirations do like to invade that part of the world pretty regularly. They don’t call it the “graveyard of empires” for nothing. Invaders never do well there in the long run.

  • Greenflag

    ‘all the problems in the world have been caused by the US and the UK.’

    It’s the USA and UK and others whose miltary and governments are in Iraq and Afghanistan not the other way around. Afghanistan has been at war since the 1970’s and the Iraqis are on the verge of another descent to chaos . Perhaps the next effort of the western powers will be to export ‘democracy’to China ?

    The ‘predatory’ Anglo American óil corporations are now on the make in Iraq which was more or less the point of it all . That and Bush Jr’s attempt to finish the job his father started in the early 1990’s.

    The election in Afghanistan is being held with a government clampdown on press reports on violence at polling stations . A third of the country is outside the remit of the Kabul government and that’s during daytime 🙁

  • Greenflag

    Pete,

    “The price of conjuring peace out of conflict is that justice is not done; most crimes go unpunished.”

    Where exactly does Goldfarb’s ‘justice’come from ? Presumably it must be from the ‘justice ‘of the previous regime which begs the question of why would people revolt against a regime that is ‘just’?
    Throughout history across all cultures what is called ‘justice’ is the legal authority of those who exercise state political and economic power .
    The separation of the powers of the judiciary and the state is an ideal which comes closest to it’s realisation in practice and not just in theory in the wealthy countries of the west . We recall or we should recall with some embarassment the ‘judgements’of some of the ‘judiciary’during the early days of the NI conflict ?

    There was ‘justice’in the former USSR , in Nazi Germany and even in present day North Korea and remarkably also in Northern Ireland 1920 to 1972.

    Makes you wonder why people revolted against those regimes eh ? I read that finally even in North Korea the peasants are getting obstreporous . Northern Ireland is not Iraq nor is it Afghanistan and the same is true vice versa 😉
    The facts of geograhy and the proximities of political cultures and the land border with the republic is what made the NI half compromise achievable. Common membership of the EU helped also. And even that much took 40 years 🙁

    Those hard facts together with NI enjoying on average a standard of living multiple times that of Afghanistan or Iraq made the NI situation and it’s resolution an easier ‘nut’to crack than Afghanistan and /or Iraq will ever be !

  • 6countyprod

    WR: ‘Invaders never do well there’

    Absolutely. But what are you supposed to do when, with the full support of the Taliban, AQ trained and planned atrocities in Africa and the US from there, and were preparing further attacks? Should we have nuked them? Or maybe sent some UN negotiators? What should the civilised world have done?

  • Wilde Rover

    6cp,

    “But what are you supposed to do when, with the full support of the Taliban, AQ trained and planned atrocities in Africa and the US from there, and were preparing further attacks?”

    Stop training terrorist organizations for use in proxy wars? Al CIAda didn’t become a slick terrorist group by scratching their arses in caves: they had the best training available.
    Actually go in and look for them properly? Snuff them out early, and not drag things out over a decade while creating another haven in Iraq?

    The-asset-formerly-known-as-Tim-Osman is too valuable as a bogeyman to be caught, if he is indeed still alive. (Benazir Bhutto didn’t think so, at least before she herself met an unfortunate ending). War is big business.

    “What should the civilised world have done?”

    Something civil?

  • 6countyprod

    WR, you confuse the Afghan mujahedeen and the Arab mujahedeen. The US backed the Afghans, but the Arabs were financed by the Saudis and other Muslim countries and organisations. The Arab mujahedeen morphed into AQ.

    But maybe you are right, we should have been more civilised and left them to their fate with the Russians. Think Chechnya.

  • RepublicanStones

    6cp, going by your logic the USA should have daisycutted the bayjeesus out of Hamburg as well. The guys who flew the planes on 9/11…guess where they learned how to fly?

    This fallacy that 9/11 would never have happened if Bin Hiding wasn’t given his three square a day by the Taliban is utterly ridiculous.

    An ideology and ideas can move around much faster and easier than the most expensive hardware Uncle Sam has got.

  • Wilde Rover

    6cp,

    “The US backed the Afghans, but the Arabs were financed by the Saudis and other Muslim countries and organisations.”

    No training you say? Even if that were the case, that still leaves Saudi financed Saudis, and yet who does the US decide to invade next? The only place with no Saudis: Iraq.

    “But maybe you are right, we should have been more civilised and left them to their fate with the Russians.”

    And now we’re back to the Great Game.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  • Brit

    That the US and allies had a legal and moral right to respond to the act of war that was 9/11 is pretty self evident to me. Clearly the intervention in Afghanistan has not created a secular liberal democracy, and I know few supporters of the war who thought it would. Removing the Taliban from power has surely had a limited liberating effect on parts of Afghanistan where people can play music, some girls/ women can go to school, there is a plurality of political views expressed and Shi’ites can practice their version of Islam. Equally, or perhaps more, importantly, the war removed the AQ client state. Yes the ideology of AQ and the global franchise and networks are still there but without a stable base and under continual attack and harassment there is no doubt the strength of the movement has changed. Had the intervention in Afghanistan not been undertaken who knows what further terrorist atrocities in the West and elsewhere may have been undertaken. Perhaps Pakistan, and its nuclear capability, would have fallen into AQ/Taliban hands – which is probably the ultimate nightmare scenario in foreign affairs. What those on this site who oppose the war have been opposed to military intervention at that stage?

    It will be a long war of attrition and counter-insurgency which will wax and wane. The resolution of it will involve making all sorts of unsavoury deals and will not lead to some beacon of secular democracy, but it is one frontline in the war against violent/jihadi Islamism. A war on which those of us anywhere on the left-liberal spectrum should be solidly behind anti Jihadi forces.

  • Wilde Rover

    Brit,

    “That the US and allies had a legal and moral right to respond to the act of war that was 9/11 is pretty self evident to me.”

    You think they should have invaded Saudi Arabia?

    Funny, but I thought you might have deemed them to be criminals.

    I believe that the Taliban said they would have been more than happy to hand over bin Laden once provided evidence of his guilt in this attack. This is a standard procedure in these situations.

    The following link shows why the FBI has bin Laden on their Most Wanted list, and there is no mention of 9/11.

    http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

    If you have any evidence linking him to 9/11 then perhaps you should contact the FBI, because as far as they are concerned he isn’t a suspect.

    “Had the intervention in Afghanistan not been undertaken who knows what further terrorist atrocities in the West and elsewhere may have been undertaken.”

    The Anglo-American alliance created a situation where they could operate freely in a country they had never had any foothold: Iraq.

    In fact, it was the local Iraqi groups who, taking a break from the Anglo-American instigated civil war, managed to rout much of the so-called AQ.

    “Perhaps Pakistan, and its nuclear capability, would have fallen into AQ/Taliban hands – which is probably the ultimate nightmare scenario in foreign affairs.”

    The invasion of Afghanistan has resulted in Taliban forces crossing into the northern part of Pakistan. There is every chance they may topple the government there. Careful what you wish for.

    “A war on which those of us anywhere on the left-liberal spectrum should be solidly behind anti Jihadi forces.”

    Imperialism with a fancy name is still imperialism.

  • Brit

    “You think they should have invaded Saudi Arabia?

    Funny, but I thought you might have deemed them to be criminals.”

    This is whataboutery. Either the US and allies did or didn’t have a right / duty to fight in Afghanisatan. Whether they had such a right or duty in relation to Saudi Arabia does not change that.

    “I believe that the Taliban said they would have been more than happy to hand over bin Laden once provided evidence of his guilt in this attack. This is a standard procedure in these situations.

    The following link shows why the FBI has bin Laden on their Most Wanted list, and there is no mention of 9/11.

    http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

    If you have any evidence linking him to 9/11 then perhaps you should contact the FBI, because as far as they are concerned he isn’t a suspect.”

    So 9/11 wasn’t an AQ inspired and planned operation? Are you a troofer? I suppose the fact that all the Jewish employees stayed at home proves it was a neo-zio con plot as a pretext for US wars for oil or poppies or something?

    Good old Taliban following “standard procedure” – innocent until proven guilty is almost as important to them as the rule of law.

    “The Anglo-American alliance created a situation where they could operate freely in a country they had never had any foothold: Iraq.

    In fact, it was the local Iraqi groups who, taking a break from the Anglo-American instigated civil war, managed to rout much of the so-called AQ.”

    The civil war as an inevitable result of the end of Saddam and Baathist/Sunni control. It would have happened sooner or later just like the Hindu/Muslim bloodshed when Britain withdrew from India. Using this as an argument against toppling Saddam is no more convicing that arguing that Brtain should have stayed in India. You also fail to distinguish causation from moral responsibility for the civil war. The latter lies principally with the protagonists including AQ groups and Iran.

    “Imperialism with a fancy name is still imperialism.”

    Firstly define imperialism. Second when someone decide that progressive opinion must fetishise anti-imperialism over and above all else. Is it better to allow genocide that to be imperialist. Does anti-imperialism trump anti-fascism or anti-islamism.

  • Wilde Rover

    Brit,

    “This is whataboutery. Either the US and allies did or didn’t have a right / duty to fight in Afghanisatan. Whether they had such a right or duty in relation to Saudi Arabia does not change that.”

    The Anglo-American alliance has the right to do anything it likes. The past fifty years stand as a testament to that. Might is right.

    “So 9/11 wasn’t an AQ inspired and planned operation?”

    Not according to the FBI, it would seem, or at least anything to do with bin Laden.

    “Are you a troofer?”

    This is the type of ad hominem attack that usually indicates a lack of critical thought. By the above accusation you are placing the FBI in the firing line for being “troofers.” Do you think the FBI is the Federal Bureau of Troofers?

    “I suppose the fact that all the Jewish employees stayed at home proves it was a neo-zio con plot as a pretext for US wars for oil or poppies or something?”

    Blaming individual racial groups for what may or may not be occurring behind the scenes in geo-political circles is the sort of simplistic pseudo deduction that drags all human discourse into the gutter of the inane. Accusing people who have never even mentioned any racial group of being racist groups is extending the ad hominem attack to even greater absurdity.

    “Good old Taliban following “standard procedure” – innocent until proven guilty is almost as important to them as the rule of law.”

    Extradition usually takes place when there is evidence supplied of wrongdoing. You wouldn’t want Tony Blair extradited from your country before the proper evidence of war crimes were presented, would you?

    “The civil war as an inevitable result of the end of Saddam and Baathist/Sunni control.”

    False Flag attacks carried out by Anglo-American forces helped to destroy the society in Iraq. The two “Laurence of Arabia” British black ops guys who had to be busted out of an Iraqi jail by knocking down the walls of the prison is merely the tip of the iceberg.

    The tricks learned in similar false flag attacks in Ireland served them well.

    “Using this as an argument against toppling Saddam is no more convicing that arguing that Brtain should have stayed in India.”

    I’m not a fan of Saddam’s: he was a useful puppet for the western powers in his day and he got cast aside like the rest. However, asking for an argument as to why any government should be toppled is in itself evidence of an imperialist mindset.

    “You also fail to distinguish causation from moral responsibility for the civil war. The latter lies principally with the protagonists including AQ groups and Iran.”

    AQ only came into Iraq as a result of the chaos caused by the invasion. Any Iranian infiltration is as a result of porous borders created by the invasion.

    “Firstly define imperialism.”

    The policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.

    “Is it better to allow genocide that to be imperialist.”

    The last twenty years in Iraq have been one long act of genocide. The destruction of this country is almost at hand.

    I suppose it is too much for British and Americans to accept the horror of what has happened.

    And before you say it, yes, as a citizen of the Republic of Ireland I am also responsible for the genocide in Iraq, thanks to Shannon. I am also the bogeyman.

    If you cannot face the demons in the darkest part of your soul then you are truly lost.

  • Brit

    Oh FFS man of course it was AQ organised and Bin Laden sponsored. The lack of specific evidence of Bin Laden’s personal role is as irrelevant as the lack of specific evidence in Hitlers personal role in each atrocity in WW2. That it was an AQ attack is a historical fact just like the Moon Landings and the Holocaust and I treat those who dispute it in the same manner – hence the reference to troofers and conspiracy theorists.
    As to the “Anglo-American alliance has the right to do anything it likes” well I was talking about a moral and legal right rather than ability and you haven’t addressed the whataboutery point.
    “False Flag attacks carried out by Anglo-American forces helped to destroy the society in Iraq. The two “Laurence of Arabia” British black ops guys who had to be busted out of an Iraqi jail by knocking down the walls of the prison is merely the tip of the iceberg.
    The tricks learned in similar false flag attacks in Ireland served them well.”
    Are you suggesting that the allies wanted a civil war and breakdown of civil society? On any analysis of the war aims that seems bizarre.
    “AQ only came into Iraq as a result of the chaos caused by the invasion. Any Iranian infiltration is as a result of porous borders created by the invasion.”
    No AQ came to Iraq because they decided because blowing up civilians (and others) to fight for the truth against Shiites and “Crusaders” as they see it is the holiest and most just of fights. Iran also choose to get involved for a mixture of ideological and strategic reasons.
    “The policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.”
    Well unless you stretch the word authority to ridiculous lengths then this does not describe the role and action of the USA in either Iraq or Afghanistan. There is a much better case for arguing that Russia or Syria fit the imperialist paradigm – but of course the kitsch anti-imperialists are really anti US/West/Israel.
    “The last twenty years in Iraq have been one long act of genocide. The destruction of this country is almost at hand.” Saddam killed some 200,000 in acts of genocide – as a result of the invasion we are unlikely to see that again.
    Bottom line is that unless you a pacifist you believe that force must be used in the fight against islamism/terrorism. In practice that means being prepared to support the US armed forces. I am prepared to do that despite huge reservations about US foreign policy and principles, particularly under George W just as I would have supported Stalin’s Red Army during WW2.

  • Wilde Rover

    Brit,

    “That it was an AQ attack is a historical fact just like the Moon Landings and the Holocaust and I treat those who dispute it in the same manner – hence the reference to troofers and conspiracy theorists.”

    I admire your quasi religious convictions. Perhaps you are a little too young to remember the 1980s, when funding money to Arab fundamentalists, specifically the ones operating now, was all the rage. Old age creeping up on me, I know. But you keep hurling your ad hominem attacks if it comforts you.

    “No AQ came to Iraq because they decided because blowing up civilians (and others) to fight for the truth against Shiites and “Crusaders” as they see it is the holiest and most just of fights.”

    And yet their biggest enemy in the region was Saddam, who was removed by Anglo-American forces, thereby indirectly supporting them.

    “There is a much better case for arguing that Russia or Syria fit the imperialist paradigm – but of course the kitsch anti-imperialists are really anti US/West/Israel.”

    I find it sad that you do not even have an instant of self reflection in this matter. Perhaps you really are on a “Crusade”.

    “Are you suggesting that the allies wanted a civil war and breakdown of civil society? On any analysis of the war aims that seems bizarre.”

    If that seems bizarre to you then perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the Norman invasion of your country. A guy called William had a maxim for this kind of activity, if I am not mistaken.

    “Saddam killed some 200,000 in acts of genocide – as a result of the invasion we are unlikely to see that again.”

    Half a million dead children as a result of the Clinton bombings during the 90s alone, and yet you have the gall to try and lump me together with holocaust deniers.

    There are none so blind as those who will not see.

  • Wilde Rover

    The death toll is much higher than that since the invasion.

    You really can’t see it, can you?

    You know, I think I have more respect for the old school Brits like Churchill. At least they called a non-white man a spade, and said that all their stuff belonged to the white man. Compared with the hypocritical self-delusions of today it is a breath of fresh air.