Thoughts on the War on Iraq 2003 to date:

Is this a Liberation or Conquest?

Like a multitude of people all over the world I have been watching on CNN, BBC World, and Skynews. I have become bored with the coverage and made an observation similar to what John Weldon had to say in The Age this morning,

"We're going to take a break here on CNN, but when we return we'll repeat the same news as we repeated all morning."

Altough the large media organisations have embedded journalists in US and British units as they move into Iraq and engage the enemy, there is a linited video worth viewing for the short attention span of us viewers, so it gets recycled again and again. There are other sources, like those brave correspondants on the wrong side of the battle, in Bagdad and Basra, who run the risk that ITV jounalist Terry Lloyd and his team experienced near Basra. Then their is a blogger within Bagdad, a mystery todate according to the press, but he can be found at www.dearraed.blogspot.com, all I can comment at this stage is, he is middle class (access to the internet) and therefore reasonably educated and realtively young compared to this 46 year old correspondant.

I would hesitate to say, that this has the potential to be a well reported war, we must always remember that the "embedded" journalists in the "Coalition of the Willing" are subject to military censorship, and the same for the journalists in Bagdad using Iraqi facilities to get their stories out, then you have the odd journalist that is independant, and will from time to time, put in a well researched report on a particular event that the Pentagon or Saddam haven't interfered with. These intrepid individuals allow us in our armchairs to make sense of a terrible event in the history of Iraq, one that promises much and has the potential to do much damage in the process.

I am greatly relieved to date that the US Military Doctrine of "Total War" has not been applied at this stage, the military commanders (General Tommy Franks) have gone out of their way to minimise casualties amongst the civilian population and even amongst the Iraqi Army, although it is early days yet. The US and its Coalition have sustained casualties and the Iraqis have captured coalition prisoners of war, which has changed the dynamics of the psychology amongst us observers. We wre lead to believe that this would be rapid invasion with a toppling of the regime and a rapid occupation. The problem is, how rapid is rapid, the military are happy with the progress of the units towards Bagdad and the air campaign, but the idea of a quick war was given to us by our politicians in Washington, London, Madrid, and Canberra. I'm afraid I do not trust them, and now chalk all the pre-war hype to propaganda, not reality. It appears the US has started with insufficient troops and really needs another division or so, which the pundits are telling us will take a couple of weeks to a month to be set up for operations. I don't believ that is the case, mainly because one US armored brigade is equivalent to 5 brigades of the Iraqi's, simply becaus eof their mobility, firepower and they are manned by professional soldiers. We Australians are patting our selves on the back for the Australian units ability to fight "well above their weight", and I am convinced the US units, and our British Units are doing the same, especially with Air Support. Therefore I don't expect the campaign to hault anytime soon.

The news from Basra is that the Water and Power has been cut to that large city, this I feel is a dangerous turn of events and indicates a siege is in the planning, this can only be starvationa nd disease for the local population, not for the Iraqi Army units that the Coalition is trying to dislodge and surrender. We need our Iraqi Civilians on our side, not Saddams, and such a move maybe counter productive. I know the Urban Warfare is difficult and dangerous for the ground troops and can degenerate to a guerilla war very rapidly, so I quess the commanders are trying to avoid that.

Australias place in this coalition can only be as a friend of the US, with our defense agreements and trade negotiations highest in our politicians minds, it can't possibly be because Iraq is a threat to Australia. We were actually trading with this nation, weat and sheep, so I doubt they would do anything against us unprovoked. Al Qaeda is another story, as the bombing of that Bali place causing the death of many Australian holidaymakers proved. That was more related to Australia's realtionship with Indonesia and, in particular the business over East Timor, which was 20 years over due in my humble opinion (Australia's military intervention in East Timor).

Let us hope and Pray that rational minds prevail and we can look forward to a Free Iraq, with all sides participating in Government and the basic freedoms made available again to all Iraqi's. even the Kurds in the North.

Any comments, please e-mail me at clifford@dubery.com

War and Rhetoric

After observing the media, both television and the press lately and their reporting of the unfortunate business in Iraq, I felt I should comment. So here goes!!

To start with, the consept put by the pro war lobby in relation to Iraq that the opposition to the war is "aiding and comforting Saddam Hussein" and is therefore irellevant to the debate as said by John Howard (PM of Australia). Such rhetoric is insulting to say the least and this one was related to an offence "Aiding and Comforting the Enemy", and it was almost like the PM insisting that all the opposition to his decision for Australia to assist the US in its fight against Iraq is working for the Enemy, namely Saddam Hussein. Such rhetoric are lies and an insult to our intelligence.

All this is reminiscent of George W Bush's now famous "You are either with us or against us" speech. Such binary thinking in this multi-polar world is peculiar to say the least. We can certainly identify our enemies, however, they vary. There is the Hamas and LFPA (Liberation Front for the Liberation of Palestine I think) in Israel that committed many terrorist attacks in the west and currently in Israel itself, in the false belief that it will get Israeli settlers out of the West Bank and establish an independant Palestinian State. I say false, because just from my observations over the last 30 years I have been aware of that conflict, nothing has been achieved to benefit the Palestinian within Israel by these criminal acts. The other terrorists are in the South American area and the Arabian Peninsula exported to Palestine and Afghanistan. Then more recently terrorism is being used in Chechnya and elsewhere, no longer sponsored by the communists, but more likely nationalists.

The Proposed War In Iraq:

A Commentary on Binary Thinking as "You are either for us or against us"