The Daily Bork

January 31, 2005

Who do you think you are kidding Ms Mattsson, if you think we are on the run... (to the tune of Dad's Army)

Great uncertainty over allies retreat
Stor osäkerhet om allierades reträtt (Göteborgs Posten)

Dunkirk? The Soviets under the hammer of Barbarossa? Nope. The allies are "retreating" from Iraq, according to this "Analysis" column (not labelled as such online, but was in the print version) by Ms Mattsson. Funny definition of retreat... achieve the objective and then, if requested by the new government, withdraw.

Bush har vunnit sitt återval och sagt att han har mandat för den politik som han avser att föra. Problemet är att det är svårt att tolka vad han egentligen vill. Installationstalet handlade om att sprida demokrati och frihet över världen men om det innebär ytterligare militära aktioner är oklart.

Bush has won reelection and said that he has a mandate for the policies he intends to implement. The problem is that it is hard to translate what he really wants. The inauguration dealt with spreading democracy and freedom throughout the world but if it involves further military action is unclear.

Bush won reelection, ergo he has a mandate. Case closed I would have thought. Is it really that hard to translate what he wants? Of course not. The international left has been left blinded to a simple statement of ideals by the obfuscation of the likes of Clinton and most of the Eurocrats, where it is in fact difficult to tell if they mean it or not past the next opinion poll. And if it means military action? Why I would imagine that would depend on the scenario, and is it not rather churlish to expect a detailed military strategy to be laid out at an inauguration? Wouldn't that be unilateral and unconsultative and all that?

För Bush är den negativa amerikanska opinionen inte oviktig men presidenten har ofta talat om att Irakkriget inte handlar om att "bli populär". Men det handlar inte heller "bara" om demokrati. USA har strategiska intressen i regionen och att ha fotfäste i "det nya Irak" är väsentligt när gamla allierade som Saudiarabien framstår som osäkra.

For Bush the negative American opinion [to the at the time of inauguration, source not cited] is not unimportant but the president has often said that the Iraq war isn't meant [for him] to "become popular". But it doesn't deal "only" with democracy. USA has strategic interest in the region and to have a foothold in "the new Iraq" is essential when old allies like Saudi Arabia appear insecure.

Ah yes. Any action that furthers the interest of the USA is, ipso facto, devious, underhanded, unjustified, whatever. The fact that abandoning Iraq now would be disastrous for all involved is unimportant. Clearly the US should have withdrawn from Europe immediately after WW2 and left it at the mercy of the Soviets as well, after all defeating the Axis wasn't "only" about bringing democracy to Germany. Saudi Arabia an old ally? Insecure? A rather weak analysis. More like a foothold in a (hopefully) moderate middle-eastern state with which to root out remaining islamofascists, discourage antics from Syria and Iran and indirectly influence the situation in Israel, grow democracy in Iraq to encourage the populaces of the the likes of Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran to start demanding there own liberties. A bit more complicated than "Blood for oil" but then, nothing is never really simple.

Av en opinionsmätning som BBC World Service gjort framgår att 64 procent av de brittiska väljarna anser att återvalet av Bush är negativt för världsfreden. Mätningen har genomförts i 21 nationer världen över (Sverige finns inte med) och opinionen i Turkiet är mest negativ med 82 procent. Det är bara i tre av de undersökta länderna som de positiva markeringarna är starkare än de negativa. I Filippinerna, Polen och Indien ser en majoritet av de tillfrågade återvalet av Bush som positivt.

In an opinion poll conducted by the BBC World Service 64% of the British voters think that the reelection of Bush is negative for world peace. The survery was conducted in 21 nations (Sweden was not included) and the opinion in Turkey is most negative with 82%. It is only in three of the surveyed countries that positive responses are stronger than the negative. In the Phillipines, Poland and India a majority of those questioned were positive about the reelection of Bush.

Or, in an alternate universe, the world's largest democracy and the largest member state of the EU were positive about Bush's reelection. 15 other unspecified countries were negative to an unspecified degree. The survey was carried out by a paragon of impartiality which has never been known to conduct dubious polls.

Somewhat further down...

Det har lett till paralleller med Vietnamkriget där USA eskalerade militärt och över 50 000 amerikaner dog innan de amerikanska trupperna tvingades lämna landet.

It has led to parallels with the Vietnam war where the USA escalated the war and over 50,000 Americans died before the American troops were forced to leave the country.

Forced, not by the North Vietnamese but by the intolerable political situation created by whom? Oh yeah, the media and virtual 5th column at home. And how many people died after this withdrawal? But that doesn't matter, they were only South Vietnamese and don't really count.

But why bring up Vietnam? Why not Germany or Japan or Korea? Well, the media is still carrying a torch for...

och i förra årets valrörelse blev John Kerrys tjänstgöring i Vietnam en av kampanjens hetaste frågor.

and in last year's election John Kerry's service in Vietnam becmae one of the campaigns hottest questions.

Hottest questions because his brilliant strategists had the idea that it would be good to try and run on it. But be that as it may, what one Earth does Johnny have to do with the retreat of American troops from Iraq?

John Kerry röstade nej till Condoleezza Rice som utrikesminister efter utfrågningen i senatens utrikesutskott.

John Kerry voted no to Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State after questioning in the Senate.

Along with his mate, the terrible old racist Byrd, proud former Klansman and all-round Democratic good guy.

The article goes on for another couple of paragraphs, mostly about Kerry and how he voted for the war before he voted against it which was apparently only because he was lied to and not because the opinion polls indicated a flop instead of a flip that week.

Analysis? Sigh, it reads more like a high school essay by some kid who has just discovered socialist politics with a passion.


Post a Comment

<< Home