with which we have been dosed for so long” –how the BBC was described a while back.
“These well-meaning gentlemen of the British Broadcasting Corporation have absolutely no qualifications and no claim to represent British public opinion. They have no right to say that they voice the opinions of English or British people whatever. If anyone can do that it is His Majesty’s government; and there may be two opinions about that. It would be far better to have sharply contrasted views in succession, in alteration, than to have this copious stream of pontifical, anonymous mugwumpery with which we have been dosed for so long.” – Winston Churchill from a speech in the House of Commons, February 22, 1933.
Sounds like Mr Churchill was looking for some kind of “pick-me-up” too. (See below.) (via Andrew Sullivan)
UPDATE: Check out another telling Churchillian quote here just below the item on the BBC, observed to be “in the vanguard of anti-Bush hysteria.”
I agree that the US and it’s allies are isolated in Iraq. Apart from the original set of allies who were part of the war and who currently have forces in Iraq, no other nation has come forward to support the American coalition.
Despite repeated calls for troops, the participation of “new” forces has not been forthcoming. You may like to refer to Thursday, Nov. 13th’s reports of Japan’s and South Korea’s decisions towards sending their forces to Iraq.
I am not familiar with the complete list of countries that have proved reluctant to provide troops, but Parkistan, India, France, Germany, Russian, & others figure in this group.
And you might be interested in browsing the following links:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=676&ncid=676&e=17&u=/usatoday/20031107/ts_usatoday/11941765
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=3&u=/ap/20031112/ap_on_re_us/veterans_day
The point is Jojo- the BBC often portrayed it as if the US, to all intents and purposed, HAVE NO ALLIES actually working alongside them. That’s what Paul Reynolds was insinuating to the unwary- and that’s what we, the readers, are, until informed properly by the media. That’s misrepresentation, with a political goal, and in my view quite wrong.
There could have been massive coverage of the US’s allies working peacefully and largely successfully in the Southern half of Iraq until the latest setback, but there hasn’t been because the BBC’s has been crouching around Baghdad intent on crisis-making by elevating every chucked grenade to the world’s gaze.
Of course, Jacques Chirac might not count the Poles, since they would be insignificant new boys who should just get in line, but I do, and I think that Reynolds should too because to some extent British and Iraqi lives are resting at the moment on that alliance. Of course Italy has sometimes been regarded as a poor cousin of France, but that’s just prejudice.
You are of course right that many countries have declined, but not all because the US is isolated. I do not really count the French or Germans because their behaviour has been so hideous- politically motivated or purely malicious. Turkey backed down because of the Iraqi protests. Japan is still umming and ahhing about its contingent- and don’t forget that it would overturn sixty years of history for them to send troops. Pakistan I understand is still a possibility. These countries are very significant, but not seen that way in the old Europe (I suppose ‘old’ isn’t really an insult unless you are paranoid) with which the BBC is familiar.
Furthermore, the UN was united recently in its support for Iraq’s development. The US were not isolated then, and what else are they working for except to get Iraq back on its feet? So the US are not isolated in Iraq, even on military terms- at the moment. With Beeb aided propaganda however, they might become so soon, or at least weakened, and of course the main beneficiaries of that would be that nice benign group of gentlemen who used to run the country.
Jojo, if the USA & GB have Russia Germany and France unwilling to join them in a venture they must be getting something right!
Even some of the US media seem to forget that there are other allies besides UK in Iraq. Truth told, the general idea (in US/UK media) seems to be that US would need the rest of the “old Europe” to follow suit and join this venture and that is why they say “alone”.
Mr/Mrs Oldie- those are good points to raise- you are right about ‘alone’- that’s a convenient media myth that the BBC is happy to promote.
With regard to the BBC, I would say that unlike most American networks, the Beeb thrives on foreign affairs-especially European ones. It’s more deeply international that CNN, I would argue. It should be right up their street to cover Poles and Italians, Thais and Koreans in Iraq, but they haven’t. During the last six months they’ve given more coverage to the Ladyboys of India than the Koreans in Iraq.
With regard to the consensus that ‘the US need the rest of the “old Europe” to follow suit and join this venture’, I’d just refer to Rumsfeld and theorise that only public opinion in the US and elsewhere (including Iraq) prevents the US from committing all the necessary troops without outside assistance. Everyone else is politically necessary, but practically of limited value. Even we Ukers were termed a ‘workaround’, and I don’t think that was an idle comment from Rumsfeld.
What we really need from France is diplomatic help, specifically with regard to countries like Turkey and Syria and possibly Iran. That said, they’re workarounds- though they might be costly ones. It’s your public opinion in the US that counts overall- and that could be the cost that Saddam and his Frenchmen, sorry, ‘henchmen’, are relying on.