For those fans of the peace, who does the war has never doubt that the conflict is always no ifs and buts, and those who defend the non-violence is likely to be absent or maceration. So the first post-conflict intercontinental 11 / 9 (ie not directly resulted from 11 September 2001 and the choices made by the Americans) do not seem to clot when a clear and unanimous response from those who opposed (and in any case always?) use of arms.
In the recent past was perhaps easier: Bush was a figure that condensed and joined the peace without doubts and worries, the Nobel Prize for Peace 2009 Obama is much more difficult to view as a warmonger (even for his position deliberately secluded on Libya) and representative of the "bad West" (including the author of the Cairo speech opening to Islam, also 2009).
Because war is always a dirty, ugly thing: on the ground - with explosions, deaths, losses, errors, violence, cruelty, anger, despair - and its back room, military and political - in his aseptic press conferences, filled with data and photos from the top, where human beings are never seen, but only the targets hit, and then in the conveniences, strategies and opportunism of politicians who decide (let us arm ourselves and games) have already in mind the following.
Wikileaks and told us how deceitful are the relations between governments behind the facade of officialdom - and international agreements, resolutions, coalitions - with little humanitarian calculations and much of convenience and survival, an executive, not the victims where you go to fight.
It 's a valid always said that "the first casualty of war is truth." But the second seems to be the will of those who oppose the war (in its very principle). And just show - if you are still able to do so in the next few decades now the G8 in Genoa and 11 / 9 - for peace to defend the truth? 
In the recent past was perhaps easier: Bush was a figure that condensed and joined the peace without doubts and worries, the Nobel Prize for Peace 2009 Obama is much more difficult to view as a warmonger (even for his position deliberately secluded on Libya) and representative of the "bad West" (including the author of the Cairo speech opening to Islam, also 2009).
Because war is always a dirty, ugly thing: on the ground - with explosions, deaths, losses, errors, violence, cruelty, anger, despair - and its back room, military and political - in his aseptic press conferences, filled with data and photos from the top, where human beings are never seen, but only the targets hit, and then in the conveniences, strategies and opportunism of politicians who decide (let us arm ourselves and games) have already in mind the following.
Wikileaks and told us how deceitful are the relations between governments behind the facade of officialdom - and international agreements, resolutions, coalitions - with little humanitarian calculations and much of convenience and survival, an executive, not the victims where you go to fight.
It 's a valid always said that "the first casualty of war is truth." But the second seems to be the will of those who oppose the war (in its very principle). And just show - if you are still able to do so in the next few decades now the G8 in Genoa and 11 / 9 - for peace to defend the truth?
No comments:
Post a Comment