Trump,
Chocolate Cake and 59 Missiles
By Frankie Boyle
April
12/13, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- Nothing more perfectly embodies White America
than a 70 year old golfer firing missiles at the
Middle East from his country club. Some sticks
in the mud probably expect a host of formalities
to be gone through before attacking another
country: a UN investigation, or congressional
approval perhaps, but personally I'm just glad
to see a guy with the temperament of a
mistreated circus animal launching ballistic
missiles on a hunch. It seems statesmanlike and
decisive. It's difficult to tell what Syria's
moderate rebels are really like, as journalists
can't really be embedded with them, because
they'd be beheaded. But I refuse to be cynical:
there's every chance that Assad's end will see a
peaceful, pastoral period for Syria once groups
like Allah's Flamethrower and Infidel Abattoir
get round the table and good-naturedly sort out
their deep seated differences on the finer
points of Islamic Law. Perhaps this is a period
which Syrians will one day look back on and
laugh, if laughter is still allowed.
Not
only will Democrats support any war Trump
chooses to start, they'll be outraged by any
voters who hold it against them at the next
election. Hillary Clinton called for the
airstrikes immediately before they happened.
We'd do well to listen to the woman who is the
architect of modern Libya, where her neoliberal
intervention introduced the principals of the
free market with such clarity that the country
now has several different governments competing
for the right to kill everybody. Clinton was
criticised for running a tone-deaf, aloof
campaign but Democrats have rallied, pointing
out that many people didn't vote for Hilary
because Trump is a Russian spy, and people who
didn't vote for Hillary are Russian stooges, and
people who voted for Hillary but not very
enthusiastically are also Russian stooges, and
slowly but surely the goodwill has begun to
return.
Personally, I think it would be great if Putin
was controlling Trump. I'd love to think there
was a rational, malevolent actor directing him
rather than just a combination of his own blood
sugar levels and the concept of vengeance. I
honestly think we'd be in less trouble if he was
being controlled by the dark wizard Thoth Amon,
or if his body had been taken over by a sentient
bacterial civilisation that was using him as a
kind of Lifeship. I'm not saying it's impossible
that Trump was moved by the plight of Syria's
children, perhaps in the same way that Tony
Soprano got really upset when that guy killed
his horse, it's just that the balance of
probabilities is that he doesn't care about
them, even enough not to ban them from entering
his country.
The
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said that the
UK government had close discussions with the US
over the few days running up to the attack and
had been given "advance notice of the
President's final decision". Odd then, that
immediately after the chemical attack the
Guardian cites Downing Street officials (on a
tour of despots with the prime minister in the
Middle East) who, when asked about military
reprisals, said “nobody is talking about that”.
Sort of makes you wonder if there's any contempt
that can be shown by the US that will stop us
drooling about our "special relationship" like
we're some kind of stalker. I doubt the
Americans see us as a valued ally. We're just
somewhere that they stick a few missiles. My
best guess is that they think of us in the way
that we would think of a shed.
No
Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media
At the
prospect of a war, the media reacted with the
exuberant joy that I remember fights bringing to
a school playground. War copy sells well, and is
easier to write. A good way to get a handle on
the media's attitude to conflict is to try to
write a thousand words on a United Nations
sponsored bilateral negotiation, then the same
on a missile cutting a hospital in half. The
Guardian exuberantly described the "pinpoint
accuracy" of Tomahawks. I'm not sure accuracy is
strictly relevant when you're delivering high
explosives, the ultimate variable. In the West,
we've never needed the military spectaculars
favoured by Soviets and dictators; the news has
always been our missile parade. On MSNBC the
launch of the Tomahawks was repeatedly described
as "beautiful". And there is a certain beauty at
that point in their trajectory. Perhaps we
should focus on some other point. It would be
nice to see a shot of them ten seconds before
they drop on their screaming victims. Or two
days later when bodies are being pulled from the
rubble. Maybe a shot from ten years down the
line when the shell casings form part of a
makeshift gallows, reflected in the glass eye of
an implacable amputee warlord. Perhaps our whole
fucked up attitude to war comes from only ever
seeing our missiles taking off, only ever seeing
our soldiers setting out.
Ignoring international law is bad for all sorts
of reasons, not least because it's the same
position as Assad's. Knowing that our own
resolve is only strengthened when people attack
us and expecting other people's to be weakened
is suggestive of a kind of racism. Pouring arms
and bombs into an intractable conflict means
that you are happy for it to be prolonged and
worsen. Britain's activities in the Middle East
historically mean we almost can't imagine what a
moral position might look like. We have a huge
navy that we could use to pick up the thousands
of Syrians, Libyans and others scheduled to
drown in the Mediterranean this year, for a
fraction of the cost of the bombs we've dropped
on them. I wonder if those people know,
clambering onto boats with their frightened
children, many of whom have never seen the sea
before and will never see land again, that we
aggressively tune out images like this, should
they ever reach us at all. That we see all these
lives we could save as part of a chaotic,
insoluble mess, better not thought about; we who
focus so intently on the sleek, clear lines of
bombs.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)