[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Obama Wars Title: The Western media have lost the plot in Syria t is extraordinary to look back at Western Cold War propaganda; the scaremongering posters and films in which America is under attack from a vast alien force abroad and undercover agents at home. Very few intelligent people today would accept this propaganda as an accurate representation of reality. It is easy to see in hindsight that much Cold War propaganda was designed to create a climate of fear domestically and drum up support for overseas militarism. Nevertheless, one of the most profoundly depressing things about the British press today is how uncritically it parrots the official line when it comes to foreign policy. Since the Ukrainian crisis, the British media seem to have killed off their critical faculties and burned the remains for good measure. Even intelligent analysts and commentators have forgotten the lessons of the Cold War and have so easily slipped back into a pale imitation of a Cold War narrative. When it comes to the coverage of Russian bombing in Syria, however, the British media have surpassed themselves. The reporting on Russian airstrikes in Syria has ranged from the idiotic to the dishonest to the frankly astonishing. A headline in The Times a few weeks ago read ‘Putin defies the West!’. Clearly, Putin didn’t get the memo that Russian foreign policy is now controlled in Brussels and Washington. Putin has been presented as a cross between Professor Moriarty, Fu Manchu and Joseph Goebbels – a master strategist and evil genius using smoke and mirrors to befuddle the West as he carries out his inscrutable campaign. ‘What is he up to in Syria?’ is the constant refrain. Recently, I debated journalist and former US diplomat James Rubin at the Cheltenham Literature Festival, and he kept remarking on how inscrutable Putin was. No wonder a kind of grudging admiration for Putin occasionally creeps into the commentary. The problem is that this is utter nonsense. First of all, consider the claim that we have no idea what Russia is up to. This has been a running theme since the Ukraine crisis, but this is an outright lie. Russia’s motives in Ukraine and in Syria are well known. They are well known not because we’ve got a team of Kremlinologists scrutinising Russia’s obscure statements and mysterious behaviour, but because, as a representative of his government, President Putin has consistently told the West his intentions. Now, we may not agree with Russia’s motives, but that is an entirely different point. The fact of the matter is that Putin is not hiding his intentions. And yet the media have never reported on it. Noam Chomsky once argued that, in a democracy, things are often hidden in plain sight – this is a very good example. Similarly, it is simply not true that we do not know what Russia’s aims are in Syria. Russia is a long-term supporter of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, but is by no means averse to a post-Assad Syria; its main aim is to stop Syria from collapsing. This has all been openly stated by Putin – at the UN, for example, that little known secret forum, in an interview with CBS. We may not agree with it, but to present Russian intervention as some kind of fiendish, unfathomable plot is simply laughable. What’s more, consider the heated debate about the impact of Russia’s intervention on Syria. Who knew the British media were so concerned about the malign effects of bombing a foreign country? You certainly wouldn’t have guessed it from the coverage of the US and its allies’ own year-long bombardment of Syria. Nor do you get this impression from the media discussion of the British government’s desire to join in on the Western bombing. The British media have completely ignored the disastrous effects of Western intervention in Syria. The West has been attempting to bomb Islamic State positions while, at the same time, supporting jihadi groups such as the al-Nusra Front. Our new ‘allies’ in Syria have links to al-Qaeda. Have we totally taken leave of our senses? More to the point, why isn’t this frontpage news? And let’s not forget the US’s $500million plan to train up fighters – of whom about four or five remain. The Free Syrian Army is more or less a fiction, with little existence outside of the imagination of the State Department and the Foreign Office. At the same time, the West is allowing one of the most disgusting and shameful acts of this crisis to go on unchallenged – that is, Turkey’s bombing of the truly heroic Kurdish forces, the only coherent, pro-West political and military force in Syria and Iraq that is attacking IS. Where is all the coverage of the utterly useless, dishonest and misguided Western campaign in Syria? If this had a tenth of the coverage given to Russian bombing I think the public and political discussion in Britain would be very different. The British media present Russian political elites as out of control and crazy, but anyone looking at Western foreign policy over the past 20 years would see that the West has been the single most destabilising force in world affairs since the Cold War. We hear an awful lot about the biases of Russian state media, but the Western media have little self-awareness of their own failings. ==== Readers comments: Aquinas a day ago This is all spot on. The Western elites have such a pathological superiority complex that anyone acting independently of their control is immediately seen as suspect no matter how commonsensical their actions might be. Putin’s intervention in Crimea was his only possible option and averted a potential civil war and aiding Assad is by far the most pragmatic thing that can be done. The problem is that the West has an ideological straightjacket that can only accept absolute compliance with PC dogma and blind faith in bureaucratic procedure. The dogma is all encompassing: Environmentalism, human rights and equality are not seen as ideas that some people believe in but as terms that are synonymous with good. They cannot be argued against just like nobody argues for the legalisation of rape. These ideas have supplanted the original tenets of liberalism: rule of law, property rights and primacy of the individual. Putin does not fully abide by the new dogma and because the principle of national sovereignty is not accepted, he is demonised. Then there is the imposition of certain institutions and a specific pecking order: The UN is supposed to be the only channel through which countries can conduct their foreign affairs (the idiotic notion that the wars are OK as long as they are sanctioned by the UN). Obama and Merkel think their countries have seniority in the world and other nations must show due deference: China is resented because they act unilaterally in Africa and Putin is hated because he shows how easy it is to challenge Obama’s imaginary hierarchy once you know he doesn’t have the will or the money to oppose Russia’s actions. The West attitude to the rest of the world is a kind of petulant “How dare you! Do you have any idea who I am?” But neither Obama nor Merkel are the center of the universe anymore. They’re economically and ideologically bankrupt, and no amount of anti-Putin or refugee-hugging posturing can give them back any credibility. That a petty thug like Putin, a mediocrity like Farage and a confused old man like Corbyn are by far the most interesting and honest politicians on display is truly a sobering thought. == Garry a day ago This is all true, but building Putin up as the new Bogeyman pre-dates the Ukraine crisis, you only have to look at the BBC's hysterical coverage of the Georgian war which even an EU report conceded was started by Georgia. I think what an American led west most fear is a militarily strong and independent Russia that is able to stand up for itself, they long for the Yeltsin years when Russia was prostrate and open to the rape of its natural resources by Western big business. The fact that Putin is not a social liberal (as a large section of Russian Society isn't too) all helps with the hate-fest that the main stream media is currently cheer leading. It's the lack of curiosity by our Journalists about the real situation in Ukraine or Syria that I find shocking. == Simon_in_London a day ago Well said. I think the majority of the British people do generally agree with you (and me) and see through the media propaganda. A lot of people did seem to be fooled over Ukraine, but there has been consistent refusal to support the US anti-Assad pro-Jihad policy in Syria. To a large extent this seems true in the USA too. == dom a day ago The sycophants in the American press corps is hilarious to behold. Hanging on every word of the president as if their very careers depended on it ( which they do) . That said the boys in the bubble in Westminster are little better. And then we come to the ludicrous bbc whos "views"on what is going on has to be taken with a massive pinch of salt. Best not to bother watching. The rest of the press seem to get their "news"output from twitter. I see no reason not to support Assad over any other murderous group going and nothing the British government has come up with makes any sense at all. == mrcanada976 a day ago Finally, someone actually says it. The people in the US administration must truly think that people are abjectly stupid. When Kerry or some Pentagon type openly protests that the Russians are bombing "US assets" or rebels that have been trained, funded, and armed by Washington; and the Syrian civil war has been going on for four years, it is rediculous - they are basically admitting to prolonging the instability in the country. When it comes out that these groups are loosely affiliated with Al Queda, one has to assume that these people are high on drugs when doing their jobs. US interventionism has done nothing but screw up and create failed states, or even worse, regimes that were worse than the ones they set out to replace. The US backed the Shah in Iran, a brutal dictator with a secret police organization rivalled only by East Germany. The people uprose, they got the Islamic Revolution. Miffed, they gave Saddam Hussein money, chemical weapons, and intelligence to fight a proxy war against them, and offered him the return of Kuwait to Iraq. He fought the long bloody war for the US and deployed chemical weapons but the Iranians with Russian backing managed to keep it at a stalemate. US ally Israel continually threatens to bomb targets in Iran, and they back it up by constantly bombing targets in neighboring Syria. No wonder they want nuclear weapons as a deterrent. Of course Iraq is a complete disaster, two thirds of it is taken over by Islamic State and it has been plagued by sectarian violence ever since Saddam was toppled. A state that never had terrorists is now completely overrun by them. Despite over a year of "help" from NATO fighting Islamic State, they are now looking to Russia, because it seems that the Russians know how to get things done. Libya was a gong show. In a "no fly zone" due to Responsibility to Protect and stop Ghadaffi from using airpower to attack (US backed) rebels they bombed government targets. The country is now overrun by terrorists, and has it's own Islamic State chapter despite being quite far from Iraq and Syria. Despite 14 years of lost blood and treasure in Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden was found next to an army base in "ally" Pakistan, whom the Americans were giving billions in foreign aid. The Taliban are still a force to be reckoned with, and their "democratic government" is basically a bunch of corrupt crooks. Many Afghanis look to the Taliban for stability, at least law and order existed when they were in charge, regardless of how backwards they are. I could go on and on but the author is spot on. Russia is actually cleaning up the Americans and NATOs mess in the Middle East. Kerry and the Pentagon should be thanking them for not sending the bill. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
#3. To: A Pole (#0)
(Edited)
Kerry was a subversisive piece of shit when he faked injurys to get three purple hearts to get out of the service, then put on his uniform to testify before congress. Hillary and others picked up Kerry's antagonistic countercultural ball/rhetoric, expanded on it, then ran with it to establish their own careers. The entire political scene has become little more than a left wing written dishonest destructive grotesque vaudeville act without a trace of honor, integrity, or contact with reality. The result is going to be the agonizing end of this nation.
"left wing" only? Some could think it is a bipartisan effort.
#5. To: A Pole (#4)
Ahhh you must be referring to people that hide behind monikers! They say/claim they are one thing but their actions prove the truth is far different...
"left wing" only? Some could think it is a bipartisan effort. There are no different political parties. The repubicans are primarily the same as democraps.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|