This satirical music video, called The price of oil, shows George W Bush and Tony Blair singing about their reasons for the Iraq war.
By Paddy McGuffin in Britain:
My enemy’s enemy’s enemy … er that’s us
Saturday 21st June 2014
LOOK, over there, a unicorn!
No, that’s a donkey with an ice cream cone on its head.
Well it sort of looks like one, if you squint…
Wouldn’t fool anyone but the most gullible five-year-old would it?
Yet this is exactly the form of pathetic attempt at misdirection that Blair, Obama et al are trying to hoodwink us with, with their — ahem — colourful interpretation of the current situation in Iraq.
How bloody stupid do you take us to be?
Hellzapoppin’ in downtown Baghdad as the much-predicted sectarian slaughter continues to tear through the beleaguered country.
It’s intriguing that in 2003-4 everyone and their dog was queuing up to take “credit” for the invasion of Iraq and the situation that had been created as a result.
A decade later when the effluent is in the air conditioning you can’t find anyone who will take responsibility by beating the bushes with a big stick and a flashlight.
Which, come to think of it, sounds like quite a good plan.
You can’t have it both ways — you can’t boast that you had a decisive impact on the future state of the nation due to your illegal intervention and then say: “Oh, how did all those extremists get there?”
“I dunno, you leave them alone for five minutes…”
Now, I’m no expert when it comes to the realm of international diplomacy but, when you unlawfully slaughter up to a million people to bring “democracy” to a country I’m fairly sure the correct response when it all predictably goes to hell in a hand cart is NOT to shrug your shoulders and say: “It was like that when we found it.”
It didn’t exactly take Cassandra-like clairvoyance to predict what would happen when the West smashed up the power structures in what was a secular state in the Middle East. A place where people used to think of themselves as Iraqis before the occupation and its cronies helpfully reminded them they were Sunni or Shia and that their neighbours — rather than the occupiers — were their real enemy.
The result? A lot of angry people with guns, a seething sense of moral outrage and a certain belief that God’s on their side, that’s what.
They can’t even blame Iran this time, as much as I’m sure they’d love to, because they need the Iranians’ help to bail them out of the god-awful mess they’ve made.
Which means Blair is in a somewhat awkward position seeing as he’s spent the last decade calling for Iran to be bombed to oblivion as the head Islamic bogeymen.
Anyone with an even vaguely functioning moral compass and a half-formed conscience would feel rather embarrassed about that.
But this is Blair we’re talking about — the only man capable of speaking out of both sides of his mouth and his rectal cavity while shaking your hand and stabbing you in the back simultaneously.
Expecting any form of contrition from him is like expecting England to get through to the next round of the World Cup or Wayne Rooney to explain the theory of relativity without reference to his granny.
You see that’s the problem with the old divide and conquer policy. You have to really conquer, and then quite frequently you discover you conquered the wrong side.
After all it wasn’t that long ago Britain and the US along with assorted other imperialist warmongers were arming a certain Mr Saddam Hussain to fight, er… Iran.
And don’t get me started on the Muslim Brotherhood.
They’ve been in and out of favour so often its beginning to resemble the longest-running Hokey Cokey in history. They’re currently on the naughty step but give it a few years.
Likewise, if you’re going to start toppling heads of state you had better have a pretty good idea who’s going to step into their size tens. Just look at Afghanistan’s Hamid Karzai. What a success that was! They managed to turn a brutal theocracy into a brutal kleptocracy in one fell swoop.
Ditto Syria’s Bashar al-Assad — the man they want to replace with, er, a variety of gun-toting blokes in black known as Isis. Or maybe not.
In truth, Blair was merely the messianic marionette in this blood-soaked debacle. As always the US is pulling the strings.
Obama, showing yet again that he has learned nothing from his predecessor’s mistakes and keeping with the general ethos of his presidency that anything Dubya can do he can do just as badly, announced that he felt entitled to “bypass” Congress and go ahead with sending the bombers back in again regardless.
Well it worked well last time didn’t it? What could possibly go wrong?
The latest carnage in Iraq is largely the work of Isis, the very same extremist Sunni group which, according to those who know about these things, was apparently expelled from al-Qaida for being too mental.
Which makes you wonder what they did to be deemed too outre for bin Laden’s mob.
Sadly, I think the people of Iraq are finding out the hard way, as usual.
With nearly 600 Green Beret “advisors” and other US troops in or set to be sent to Iraq over the coming days, the Pentagon announced Friday that it is negotiating rules of engagement that the regime in Baghdad rejected two-and-a-half years ago, before the final pullout of the American military: here.
Dear Kitty. Some blog 
If Blair is responsible for the war in Iraq it says little for the house of Parliament what may be worst is the British public must be also responsible for this cruel fate of hundreds of thousands if lives? this crime also shows how weak democracy is? the Western Allies attempting to create a democracy in the Middle East having failed to enforce this system? why would any mature person believe democracy works when it can be used as a system that has taken so many innocent lives? the question is who are the terrorists? those in power are supposed to be educated? what this crime shows is the educated are not the light bearers of peace but on the contrary are criminals that are endorsed by a system that rewards crime.
It has been said that tribalism is the problem of the Middle East? it appears to me the Imperialists are tribal, their are only two tribes the right and left wing and these are no longer adversaries when it comes to a enemy invasion from a exterior source but one tribe, the one tribe then represents two factions the 1% rich and 99% poor or those on a sufficient income that have a preference to stay on as it were this could be 10% of the population as the 10% are being paid enough to keep them in line?
How this system works is the 99% population are controlled by being individuals and the 1% are united in cause that is subjugating the 99% and this group having been controlled for so long with regard to their mind that they are now normalized and now having become stupid enough they no longer require maintenance in energy to suppress them any further than what they are? as this may alarm the public who may become suspicious if to many more controls are imposed.
LikeLike
Pingback: Tony Blair, godfather of ISIS, wants to bomb Syria | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Britons against Cameron’s Syria war plans | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: ‘Inequality caused ISIS’, Piketty says | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: George W Bush godfather of ISIS, United States general says | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Britain’s disastrous wars and Jeremy Corbyn | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: US AFRICOM command calls for ‘huge’ military campaign in West Africa | Tony Seed's Weblog
Pingback: Tony Blair, forever guilty of Iraq bloodbath, his ex-minister Short says | Dear Kitty. Some blog