Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jonathan Freedland (Guardian Utd): The failed occupation

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 09:30 PM
Original message
Jonathan Freedland (Guardian Utd): The failed occupation
Edited on Tue Aug-10-04 09:30 PM by Jack Rabbit
From the Guardian Unlimited (UK)
Dated Wednesday August 11

The failed occupation
A TV station ban, 160,000 foreign troops, trumped up charges: is this the free society Iraqis were promised?
By Jonathan Freedland

They are falling like skittles in a bowling alley. One by one, the arguments for the 2003 invasion of Iraq keep tumbling. First to go was the big one. War was necessary because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It turned out there were none. Next was the insistent promise that a US-led conquest of Baghdad would end completely and forever human rights abuses committed in hell-holes such as Abu Ghraib jail. Except we saw the pictures and realised that abuses had continued even in Abu Ghraib itself - albeit under new management.
The last week has sent one more Iraqi ninepin wobbling. It is the hope on which Tony Blair has had to rest his case for war, the hope that Iraq is on its way to becoming a unique entity in the Arab world: an open, democratic society. There may be no WMD and the occupation may be a mess, Blair seems to say, but Iraq will be a democracy - and that alone will make all the pain and bloodshed worthwhile.
Now this justification is looking as shaky as the others. Of course, Iraq wasn't built in a day - and rooting a democracy in soil dried and hardened by decades of dictatorship will be no easy, instant task. The most one can expect are gradual, baby steps in the right direction. But even those are not coming.
Liberal hearts will have sunk at last week's announcement that Iraq is to restore the death penalty. But, OK, they understand. Iraq is not Sweden; the Middle East is a tough neighbourhood. Everyone else, and Iraq's American sponsor, has capital punishment for murderers so why would Baghdad be any different? Except Iraq will execute not only those convicted of murder but anyone found guilty of either distributing drugs or the handily catch-all crime of "endangering national security". That sounds like an executioner's charter. Any unwelcome political activity could be branded a danger to national security, with the irritant duly put to death.

Read more.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-10-04 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks..it's always enlightening to read from
The Guardian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC