Two Presidents in Denial

You can't help wondering about the state of mind of some of the people who reach the pinnacle of power.

We have George Bush apparently finding it quite amusing to have two shoes thrown at him by an Iraqi journalist, and he wonders "I don't know what his beef is". Then we have Robert Mugabe who denies the existence of cholera in Zimbabwe.

Only an idiot would be amused by an Iraqi throwing his shoes at you, because as most of us know, this counts as an extreme insult in Iraq and some other Middle Eastern countries. "What's his beef?" .. well, I'm guessing the guy did not find his presence in Iraq as something to be welcomed. I'm so glad Bush finds it amusing to be insulted because now he can laugh his smirking head off when I express the view that he's an idiot.

As for Mugabe, clearly this man is deranged. Not only has he ruined what used to be one of the most productive countries on the African continent, but he now comes out with the ludicrous statement that the cholera (which apparently no longer exists) was deliberately visited upon his country by the UK as a form of biological warfare being conducted by Prime Minister Gordon Brown. But even as people are dropping like flies around him, as they have nothing else to drink but sewage-contaminated water, and their money is worthless, Mugabe states the cholera epidemic has been dealt with, so there's "no further need for war".

I find it hugely depressing that we have not dealt with this psycopath with the same enthusiasm that we dealt with Saddam Hussein.

Brown, Britain and Basra

I read in today's paper that whilst Prime Minister Gordon Brown is in Washington gushing enthusiastically about his love of the USA, Americans, and American television, the love might not be reciprocated.

There may be two reasons for this: a lot of Americans don't know who the hell he is, and quite a few members of the gang currently occupying the White House are a bit pissed off with the performance of the British Army in Basra.

They don't like the fact that, having trained up the Iraqi army and police to do the job themselves (which, I recall, was their remit) they have withdrawn to an "overwatch" position. American generals want them back on the streets of Basra to give the militias there a good pounding. They are annoyed that Brown has declared his intention to draw down British troops in Iraq.

They had better get over it because we should have never have been there in the first place (nor should the Americans, come to that), and if the White House and the Pentagon think we should stay, well, tough titty! And if the Iraqis wish to conduct a civil war, then that's their business. Good luck to them, because they'll need it: Iraq is an artificial construct and I doubt if it can survive as such without it being propped up by someone else.

As for the question, "Who is Gordon Brown?" a prominent member of the Labour Party establishment opined yesterday that "Gordon Brown was put on this earth to remind us how good Tony Blair is."

With Allies like these ... (Part 2)

The Oxford Coroner finally got to show in court the US Air Force video footage from the incident in which Lance Corporal Matty Hull was killed when his convoy was shot up by an American aircraft.

Now there's a new twist: the other day the Coroner asked for the details of the American Rules of Engagement and his request was denied by the US Military. From this it transpired that the UK's own Ministry of Defence does not have this information either!

So it appears we have a bizarre situation in which British forces are fighting alongside American allies whilst having no knowledge of their Rules of Engagement.

Just how much madder is this Iraq debacle going to get?!

With Allies like these ...

L/Cpl Matty Hull of the Household Cavalry Regiment was killed in Iraq on 28th March 2003 by "friendly" fire from a US anti-tank aircraft. Last week the Oxford Coroner conducting the inquest into his death had seen a cockpit video recording from the offending aircraft. He was prevented from showing it in open court because the US military authorities would not allow it. He therefore, in some obvious anger, adjourned the hearing until or unless permission could be obtained through the Ministry of Defence. Such permission, however, could not be obtained because of US objections.

This is rare for me, but today I salute the investigative journalists of The Sun newspaper for getting hold of a copy of the video recording and publishing the full transcript in today's paper. I am pleased this has happened, not because I want to take a dig at the US pilots involved (it is clear from the transcript that they were horrified by what they had done ... "I feel sick" ... "We're in jail, dude" ...) but because the Pentagon has tried to cover up the evidence. The British convoy were displaying the internationally agreed orange panels on their tanks, indicating they were Coalition forces, and in addition to this, when firing started they released emergency flares indicating the same information.

One might understand the mistakes that can be made in the heat of battle, but surely somewhere in the command structure there must have been information concerning the whereabouts of friendly troops, and so the directive that the pilots were within a designated "kill box" is deeply troubling; so also is the apparent lack of recognition skills of the US military. There have been quite a few occurrences of Americans killing British forces, though not, I am pleased to note, any incidents of British forces killing Americans.

My criticism is principally against the US Military Authorities who have tried to keep the relevant information from coming into the public domain, much to the obvious distress of L/Cpl Hull's widow. One is tempted to say With Allies like these, who needs enemies?"