Sunni and Shi'ite United!

At long last the Sunni and Shi'ite peoples of Iraq have found common ground, something they fully agree on. It's all the Americans fault.

Okay, so perhaps that should read 'Americans and their allies', since several countries have taken part in (mis)handling the situation in Iraq, but the sheer weight of American numbers (not just the troops but the companies tasked with rebuilding the country) present and very visible presumably paints the whole mess in a very stars-and-stripes pattern to the general population.

A leading Shi'ite cleric from Najaf, Sheikh Ali Mirza Asada, states that "the roots of our problems lie in the mistakes of the Americans committed right from the beginning of their occupation", a position that his Sunni counterpart, Sheikh Harith Al-Dhari, seems to concur with. Despite the fact that he is currently a fugitive in Cairo having been accused by the predominantly Shi'ite government as a supporter of terrorism, he sings in harmony with his exilers - "Since the beginning the US occupation Iraq from bad to worse" [sic].

Whatever you may believe about the original intentions of 'liberating' Iraq the simple facts are that since the war 'ended' US troop deaths per day have increased, civilian deaths per day have increased even more, and neither statistic shows any sign of slowing down. We may not hear about bombs going off on the news any more, but that's simply because they have become so fucking commonplace that it's dull news.

What is the solution for Iraq? I'm buggered if I know. But one thing I'm certain of is that this isn't it. And when someting so consistently fails to yield results for such a long time surely the only ones who would refuse to change tack would be the imbeciles of the world. Isn't that right, Messers Bush and Cheney...?

Cheers m'dears!

Court jesting

I don't know about any of you but I am quite looking forward to the upcoming film The Last King of Scotland. No, not because it has the word 'Scotland' in the title - I am not even remotely that shallow - but because it stars Forest Whittaker and James McAvoy, two of (in my mind) the most interesting actors around. Add to that the story's factual basis on one of the most notorious figures in recent history, Idi Amin... like I said, I am looking forward to it.

And why, might you ask, do I bring this up. Well, I am sure most people are aware that the title of the film comes from Amin once claiming the Scottish throne for himself - and if you weren't you are now. This leaves me incredulous... I hate using the phrase "I'm not racist, but..." as most comments that start in this way are the most bigotted you will ever come across. But in what way did an African guy ever come to the notion that he might be the hereditary heir to the throne of a country that is very, very white? That is not to say that someone from a background other than 'North European' could never come to a future Scottish throne, presumably through marriage, but to be considered as an heir to it now? Maybe, just maybe, there was some rough and tumble between a former king and an ancestor of Mr Amin, but I'm sure that the queue for the throne would be filled with plenty of people who have greater claim.

Of course, Idi Amin was a posturer, a man who hyped himself, and believed the hype too. What is it that drives people to make such overtly outrageous claims? Yes, I know - the blog world is full of folk pretending to be other than they are, but that is a creation of a fictional persona rather than an over-inflation of the self. And of course such claims, in the political world, are laden with propoganda... Amin presumably felt that his claim to the Scottish throne would give him more kudos, if not in the international world then at least at home. And when you are lying for the home crowd it seems you can get away with more riduculous claims - remember Comical Ali insisting that the invasion of Iraq was failing even as US tanks crawled up the street behind him? Well, I know success or failure in Iraq seems to depend on your own personal standpoint (and that's a whole other post) but you get my drift!

Perhaps my favourite example of this kind of thing is a memory from my childhood when I found my Grandfather chortling at the newspaper one day. I asked him what was so funny... It turns out that a prominent figure in the Middle-East (possibly Arafat or Gaddafi) had whipped up a bit of a frenzy amongst his own supporters when he claimed that the west had wrongly claimed a famous playwright and poet as it's own, when in fact he had been an Arab living in 17th century England. The name of this disputed hero? Sheik Spear.

I shit you not!

Cheers m'dears!

The price of 'success'...

"The Danish are better than us. They just published a cartoon while we Muslims kill each other."

Dismay rings in the words of Abu Rasoul as he stands beside his bomb-damaged mosque in Iraq. After the devastation of a particularly holy Shi'ite shrine in Samarra earlier this week revenge was swiftly meted out when more than 90 Sunni mosques were attacked. The death toll is already in treble figures.

So this is the brave new world that we imagined, is it? A scant few weeks after the 'success' of the elections Iraq seems on the verge of civil war, perhaps unsurprisingly considering the country has been pummeled into shape and manhandled by a Western 'Lord Protectorate' that knows too little about its diverse peoples - and cares about them even less. We didn't have a clue what we were getting into. The good amongst us may have been swayed by the black and white idea that a cruel dictator should be toppled. The less honourable were easily lured by the promise of black gold and lucrative re-building contracts. But regardless of motive the plan was never thought through, never tackled in a way that would provide genuine solutions for Iraq... not long term ones, for certain!

Of course there will be those who point at the Iraqi rock throwers with derision and disgust. "Look at those savages. It's a good job we're over there trying to keep control!". Those people will never see the whole forest whilst they pay so much attention to one tree, never understand the idea of cause and effect... that we are surely a large part to blame for the situation. I know that the Sunni / Shi'ite feuding goes back too far to remember, but we promised stability. We said to the people "Never fear - the West is here!". But how effective have we been? Well, I suppose that since Saddam is gone it's at least not so one-sided anymore...

Amidst the chaos and confusion sage words emerged from a most unusual source... "Violence will only contribute to what the terrorists sought to achieve" said a certain Mr George W. Bush. Wise words indeed... if only they'd come to you a few years earlier.

Cheers m'dears!