There seems to be something inexplicably attractive about the letter “I”. The American protagonist of Eat, Play, Love went, respectively, to Italy, India, and Indonesia in search of her true self. In the meantime, her government is head over heels in love with other “I” destinations: first Iraq, now Iran. Arguably, they are attracted to oil. So I was told back in 2003, and I doubt things have changed since. By the way, the U.K. is once again implicated as America’s most faithful ally.
The Guardian printed this on their front page today: “MOD prepares to take part in US strikes against Iran“. This is being done “amid fresh nuclear fears“, and while the U.K. believes that “a dual track strategy of pressure and engagement is the best approach“, “all options should be kept on the table“.
You know when we shall stop having wars? When we stop seeing war as an “option”. Or better, when the Government stops seeing it like one. Until then, prepare to lose your loved ones at every “optionable” occasion.
The comment I left on Facebook says:
I wonder… if “ordinary citizens” understand that this is all for the sake of oil, so should the army folk do, surely. Can any one of them not step up for the intergrity of the army and defense, and refuse to lead their troops to war? Let him be tried by whatever tribunal there is, and let him state that he is against this typically feudal, medieval warfare. Or is everyone happy to dance to the government’s flute, instead of listening to their conscience?
When I said the same thing in 2003 to my late British husband, it led to us breaking off for a time. I quite literally couldn’t speak to him for 3 weeks, so terribly supportive was he of the U.K. government’s actions against Iraq. How can you not support the Government, one will say? It gives you food and roof, and politicians are so well educated, what the hell are you on about?
The problem is, like all of us, the Government has two hands. With one hand it gives you roof, food, and diverse and sundry rights. With another hand it takes all of this away the minute it wages war against another country. Your taxes rise, your friends and relatives leave for war, and, just to be nice, the government begins to fear for your safety: surely, people from the invaded country may take it out on you and blow up the underground and a few buses in the city centre. So, we need to toughen security measures, and now you have to live in mild fear.
The Guardian publishes the article, and people on Facebook begin to criticise: The Guardian for complacency and bad journalism, the Government for doing whatever its heart desires. They complain that, once elected, the Government is there to enjoy all the political freedom it has been given, and therefore, the ministers are free to do as they please. But… the Government is elected by us, so you’d better complain about the fact that your country is full of people who WILL support the war, no matter how much you may be personally against it.
I complain that I don’t serve in the army, for I would do the very thing I challenge someone from the Army to do. You are obliged to defend your country, but you are not obliged to follow someone’s selfish plans. I doubt the U.K. wants to go to war. I am sure the country is sick and tired of being seen the U.S. puppy. This is all about oil, though, and pure greed will not let the U.K. to turn the back on the prospect of getting closer to oil reserves. And in this situation people’s complaints resonate with hypocrisy: yes, we don’t bloody like that our countrymen are dying in the name of oil, but it’s oil in the end, and we’ll be bloody fools to let America grab all of it.
If people had the gut to “occupy Wall Street” and other big cities in fight for their workplaces, can they not occupy the Government in fight for their peace, workplace, security, and freedom?
