I really didn't want to get into this, because I know it will annoy some of you, including some close friends, and I realized a while back that my function here is to provide escape from a mad
world and the endless bloody partisan yammer about what should be done about the mad world. So it's with no great enthusiasm, but rather a queasy feeling that one ought to stand up and be counted, that I say: I'm in favour of the coming war on Iraq, on the whole.
That's all. There it is. Please don't hate me if you feel differently. I never killed anyone and I just want to be left alone.
To my friends who are anti-war: I'm sorry, but your frustration and horror are misplaced in this case. As wars go, this will be a fairly good one. For one thing, it will remove Saddam. It can't be overstated what a jolly thing that will be for the people of Iraq. I don't think our side will run amok and deliberately target civilians as we seemed to in the Serbian war. Innocent people will still die, but only a fraction of those who have already been murdered by Saddam's regime, or would be in the future if he were left in power. It will mean an end to torture, institutionalized rape, and chemical weapons attacks on the Kurds. War is terrible, but there are worse things in the world, and there are far worse people in the world than Bush and Blair.
Of course, we aren't sending our troops to kill and be killed out of altruism, but this a case where self-interest coincides with something that should have been done fucking years ago on general principles.
As to what our self-interest is: it is not about oil. This war isn't about greed, but fear, an entirely rational fear of weapons of mass murder that shouldn't be permitted in anyone's hands, let alone a genocidal megalomaniac. Removing them will make the world a slightly safer place.
Yes, the West asking Saddam to hand over his chemical weapons is a clear case of Indian-giving. I would like to see anyone who armed him sent to prison. This goes double for France, which is selling materials for arms and chemical weapons to Saddam right now, and Germany, which is selling materials for chemical weapons to North Korea right now, both of whom should get a stronger sense of ethics and then come back and do their wise-old-heads of Europe routine.
Yes, the UN should be doing this. But the UN appears to want to remain toothless at best or morally compromised at worst, so it's left to us.
One other thing: please let's all stop sniping at one another so viciously when debating this. It is a complex ethical decision either way and no-one, barring omniscience, can be sure of the moral high ground on either side. I know what I think is right and so do you, and let's try and respect one another's viewpoint (so long as it is informed, intelligent and honest, and not a steaming great pile of shite, obviously). Those who disagree with you are not, necessarily, idiots, morons, fascist bastards, pinkoes, Western Imperialist pigs, communist dupes, America-haters, Euroweenies, brainwashed zombies, terrorist sympathizers, capitalist lackeys or dribbling mongoloids.
Now, I intend to retire into my ivory tower of books, music and objets d'art for the next few months, and when I return I expect to find everyone, all over the world, being nice to one another. Is that understood?
Article by Julie Burchill which rings a bell, although I don't agree with all of it
Another article that strikes a chord
Another good one
Another
Christopher Hitchens on Chirac