Galloway - 1 :: US War Machine - 0
If you haven’t heard of British MP George Galloway yet, it’s probably because the passionate anti-war activist hasn’t made his way to your neck of the woods to authoritatively dismantle any and all outmoded rationales for the US presence in Iraq. Fortunately for you, Clamor contributor Evan Serpick was able to sit down with Mr. Galloway to discuss a recent debate between Galloway and Christopher Hitchens, the war, the Iraqi resistance, the nature of terrorism, the anti-war movement, the US political climate, and his curious American ancestry. Read this exclusive Clamor interview here.
September 26th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
Hiya All,
From the wrong side of the pond, can I ask you to keep Gorgeous George.
It will be a very good bargain, after all this was the man as a councilor in Dundee, raised the Palestinian flag above the city chambers. And later, was asked to advance his political career elsewhere.
This was the man who was an apologist for Saddam Hussein (quote - “We salute You”) knowing of the torture chambers and mass murder of the regime. But he never, ever, received any money from oil transactions with Saddam’s Iraq no matter how many allegations are made against his outstanding upright reputation. Really, and anyone who suggests that Mr Galloway has done so, should be threatned with legal action.
This was the man who created what could be said to be a small controversey about his interesting love life. See ancient grease, better with modern Greek ladies - stickier though if found out as he was, twice.
This was the man, who his local party activists in his Glasgow parlimentary constituency thought was a complete and utter wanker (UK slang: US - tends to solitary sexual activity) and advised him to try somewhere else.
I am given to understand, that Gorgeous was a member of the Young Communists, and as such was taught how to debate and argue.
If you wish to go through his arguments, you will find few arguments, but diatribes amany and diversions aplenty, but very few actual realistic arguments. Because, then his arguments could be disputed - and that is not what he wants you to do. He wants you to be glamoured with his personality as much as a Mao Tse Tung or Stalin.
We in the UK knew that he would wipe the floor with your staid and upright politico’s because they have never had to stand up against a street fighter who doesn’t understand the Queensberry rules - if he see’s a belt, he wants to know how low beneath it he can hit.
In the UK, we can recognise a wanker for what he is, and while some think for a time that he is the next Messiah, after a while, they can see someone who can only believes in himself.
After all, he is the only Parliamentary member of his own political party. And at the next General Election, or depending how successful he is in the US, hopefully sooner, will find lucrative employment promoting himself elsewhere.
I have no problems with the anti Iraq war movement. I respect your beliefs, even though I think you are wrong. And wrong for reasons that you may not have considered.
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, had been supported - wrongly - as a balwark against Communism - by the US and UK and against Islam by the old USSR and France, and a lot of others.
Saddam, believes that he is omnipotent and will be recognised by the Arabs and Muslims as a saviour. He believes that he can defeat the western nations and bring power back to what we call the middle east. With, of course, himself as the saviour.
I believe that, either Saddam, or one his sons, would have brought about world war using all the weapons, chemical, biological and nuclear (supplied by the nations who were going to be destroyed, for money, for promises, for the possibilities of future advancement in the “new world”) paid for by oil revenue, by all those who drive cars, fly planes etc..
The boil needed to be lanced, before it festered into something more dangerous. We, the West, supported and fed this mass murderer, war monger, conniver and death dealer. We fed and propped him up, we sold him arms and munitions (which during the first Iraq war were found by our troops to be be more advanced than those they had available to themselves, from the same factories).
During the Iran Iraq war, both the US and Uk, along with many others, supplied weapons systems to both sides, illegally, and for some very profitably.
Instead of arguing against the war, we should be asking why the war had become necessary, and who benefited from the weapons that we supplied previously, who bought the oil and who profited from DEATH? Cod liver oil and vitamins anyone?
And what would have happened if the boil had been allowed to fester - how many deaths would have happened and whose fault that no action had been taken earlier?
If it quacks, waddles and is covered in feathers, you could maybe think it was a duck. What was Saddam Hussein and his family?
Thoughtfully
Yours
Rhuadgh
October 12th, 2005 at 3:45 pm
This is exactly why the current war is a hypocrisy. Are you suggesting that Saddam was a Frankenstein’s monster that we couldn’t have stopped without destroying Iraq? After the first Iraq War, President H.W. Bush told Saddam’s opposition to rise up and then let them be slaughtered. The santions only empowered Saddam. I think there were opportunities and possiblities for better solutions. Besides the reasons given to us for war were not simply to remove the monster. That could be applied to a number of leaders and is illegal. It is illegal, because it is a suicidal precedent. I don’t buy your apologist point of view. I believe there must have been a better way. If getting rid of Saddam, spreading democracy, taking the fight to terrorists or protecting the oil from terrorist, were legitimate reasons for war, why weren’t they used before the war started? It is all but irrelavent if Galloway is a just a self promoter and opportunist. I don’t believe he had much influence on Middle East politics. His pitch is that places like Palestine and Iraq have been used as pawns. They have and long before any of us were aware of global politics. His sin may be exploitation and profiteering along with many. Having said that, our congress needed a kick in the backside with the Queensbury rules and I enjoyed watching it. I want to thank him for that, even though I may need to condemn him for other behaviors.
October 20th, 2005 at 9:05 am
Galloway is a red communist, what more do you need to know? Only a bolshevik jew lefty would want to have anything to do with this man.
October 20th, 2005 at 12:53 pm
Dear labelist,
What era do you live in? Have you taken your meds today? Don’t listen to those voices in your head! They are not real.