Recent Posts...
Page 8 of 58
Archive
A little help, please? | Mar 26, 2003 17:39
As the war in Iraq turns one week old, I am ashamed to admit that I have absolutely no idea what is going on.
It's not because of a shortage of news coverage. CNN fires out updates as rapidly and with as much enthusiasm as a 16 year old losing his virginity, and the local TV and radio media has more or less given up on any local news in favour of report after mind-numbing report from embedded journalists, military strategists, defence analysts, commanders-in-chief…
This perhaps is part of the problem. Too much information with too little content. Too many towns with names that you didn't know until yesterday. Tanks bursting across the desert in the south, Turks restless in the north, a helicopter down here, a marine wounded there. While the flanking and pincer movements of the various forces are analysed to the nth degree, it's never put in any wider context. I know more about hedge funds for pork belly futures than I do about who's really doing what to whom out there in the deserts of Mesopotamia.
It seems paradoxical that in an era where a plethora of media information is so widely and freely available, both sides of the current conflict are still as busy cranking the handle of the propaganda machine as they have ever been. "News" of the war comes via our friends in the Pentagon, is disseminated via the various eager news agencies, and a split second later the report is denied publicly by the Iraqis. No surprises there, sure, but this must be the first time in the history of such conflicts where we have access to both sides of the story.
Examples to date, (and we're only in the first week, remember), include allies successfully capturing the port city of Umm Qasr, only to mysteriously continue fighting there for several days afterwards; the discovery of a camouflaged chemical weapons factory; the killing of Saddam Hussein; and today, reports of a popular uprising in Basra against the Baath regime.
More worrying than disputes over the blow-by-blow elements of the war is the increasing conjecture and apparent wild speculation coming from Washington. There's been the report that Iraq will likely use chemical weapons against its own population, then blame America for the attack. Then there's the report that stores of gas masks have been found in Iraq, apparently a smoking gun if ever there was one, pointing conclusively to the fact that where there's gas masks, there's gas…
It's odd how claims with the least substantiation are the most widely reported. Amongst claims yesterday was that the Iraqi regime had drawn a red line around Baghdad, and once it was crossed, the Republican Guard would use chemical weapons on the coalition forces. Evidence? Not so much. Still, it took a helluva lot less than six degrees of radio separation (i.e by the time it had gone from the Pentagon to Radio Pacific) before this plan was being declared a certainty, with orders leaked that had been signed by Saddam Hussein himself.
What then proceeded to scare me shitless (ref. footnote 1) – and here I sympathise with Rob O'Neill's girlie – on the basis of this supposition, George W thought it fitting to announce that if they did use chemical weapons, this would provide the right for a 'tactical' nuclear strike by way of reply. Quite how this would work, in terms of collateral damage and the like I don't know, and really would rather not think about.
Did nobody think to inform the President that somebody at the Pentagon had just made it all up?
And while we're asking the medium-sized questions:
Is anyone surprised that the coalition forces invasion is, according to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "going according to plan", when he admitted right at the start that the plan was completely "fluid", and thus "going accord to plan" could cover any eventuality?
How many civilian casualties were there in the coalition's numerous attempts to bomb Iraq's state TV HQ in Baghad? Will they later claim they were only trying to uphold the Geneva Convention by preventing the broadcast of allied POW's?
Don't expect any straight answers anytime soon.
_____________________________________
FOOTNOTES:
(1) If you really want to annoy me, use the word 'literally' to mean 'not literally', for example: "What then proceeded to literally scare me shitless…"
A Blair in the Bush... | Mar 19, 2003 10:16
48:00.00 Yesterday at 1pm, President George W. Bush told Saddam Hussein and his cohorts to leave Baghdad. Where to go, he did not say; why, he was a bit dodgy on that one too; for how long was also left a bit up in the air, but had a ring of 'permanently' about it, rather than just suggesting Hussein looked tired and could do with a couple of weeks in the Med. The 'when' though, the 'when' was pretty certain. 48 hours.
47:51.43 You could feel the collective consciousness of the media industry slipping off its seat with excitement. Not that a war was imminent, not that finally something had happened, but that there was going to be a COUNTDOWN…
47:42.24 Within minutes, the TV3 promo department (subject to much attention of late) was in full swing. By the end of the 6pm bulletin that night we cut to a slick teaser for the next night's bulletin: John Campbell "Join us tomorrow night on Three, when the countdown enters its final twenty-four hours!" One thing about Campbell, the man knows his subtraction.
47:41.94 On the station that brought you the inherently drawn-out Keifer Sutherland vehicle "24", and its sequel "25" it all seemed to fit rather too well. It was hardly therefore surprising when a small stopwatch appeared in the bottom left-hand corner (the right-hand side, of course, being reserved for the company logo) and began counting down.
47:40.29 TV3 Sales & Marketing Sponsorship Account Manager Rod Nelson got on the phone with Vodafone. Were they interested in a tie-in deal? Txt the exact time the bombs start raining on Baghdad to win a prepay prize pack… The idea is put on hold until the final eight hours to avoid appearing too eager to commercialise on modern warfare.
47.24.78 A bidding war begins between the networks to secure viewing rights. TV2, with its deep pockets, comes out the winner, and announces a special double premiere feature over Wednesday and Thursday nights, 48 Hours and Another 48 Hours. Cadbury's agrees on a sponsorship package.
46.58.47 TV1's outgoing Head of Current Affairs Heaton Dyer decides to hold a Telethon to rebuild Iraq following the inevitable conflict. It will, he reasons, be his legacy in a position where he spent the best, well at least the most recent month-and-a-half of his life. The idea is scrapped when TVNZ's new head of Interior Decorating points out that the red LCD screens which display the total amount raised would clash ever-so awfully with the new burnt sienna news set. The plan is scaled back to a powhiri and a sausage sizzle.
46.02.65 Parliament begins an urgent debate on the Iraq issue, now that it is really too late to do anything anyway. Filled with a sudden confidence, knowing that anything he might say is already irrelevant, National Leader Bill English finally decides on a position. "We shud," he states, "support our tradushional ullies."
46.01.35 When asked whether National believes we should send troops to the conflict, "in support of our tradushional ullies", English backtracks, turns around, falls over and finds himself sitting in Gerry Brownlee's lap. Why Gerry Brownlee insists on keeping his seat warm every time his beloved leader is addressing the House puzzles English, but now is not the time for such considerations. "That would depend on whether the US asked us to," he observes insightfully.
46.01.32 Richard Prebble grunts in support.
Page 8 of 58
Archive