Apparently it’s retrospective week.
Today in the BBC they look at key players in the lead up to war and where they are now.
They write of what the stance was then, how it played out and where they stand now.
The interesting part of this is that not once – go ahead, click through and read it, not once do they mention some of the multiple reasons for some of the decisions. ie The Oil for Food joke.
Kofi Annan in the BBC:
In the first few months of the conflict the UN’s headquarters in Baghdad was bombed, killing its most senior official. Mr Annan called the attack “the darkest day in our lives”.
Kofi Annan’s son in Fox News:
Kojo Annan (search), the secretary-general’s son, was employed by a U.N. contractor that monitored food and medicine shipments that were flowing into Iraq as part of the multibillion-dollar program created in late 1996.
The Oil-for-Food program is now being probed by the Justice Department and Congress as a boondoggle that enriched Saddam Hussein (search) and others. A report delivered last week by Charles Duelfer found that Saddam was able to “subvert” the $60 billion U.N. Oil-for-Food program to generate an estimated $1.7 billion in revenue outside U.N. control from 1997-2003.
The BBC mentions France and Russia and their threats to veto a second Security Resolution without mentioning the money they were in for with Saddam.
Seriously, what the hell!
In other news, Ed Morrissey notes a new poll taken in Iraq that appears to show Iraqis seeing improvements there.
And read this by Jules Crittenden-“Five Years On”. Here’s the ending.
The American people have been allowed to believe that getting out of Vietnam was the best thing we did there, and that there was no penalty for cutting our losses. It should not be surprising that so many believe the same of Iraq. Looking past the immediate victims of that historic abandonment, the Soviet Union was emboldened by our show of weakness, invading Afghanistan and triggering a fateful string of events. Iran, seized by Islamic zealots, staged the 1979 hostage crisis to kick off three decades of support for terrorism and a bid for regional domination. In both cases, the belligerents knew we would do nothing about it. Figures like Osama bin Laden, among others, noted this void, and created the circumstances we are currently compelled to address.
The United States has commitments to Iraq and the larger region and a pressing interest in the defense of free and open societies. If we avoid our responsibilities we simply plant the seeds of further conflict. The pressing question of the 2008 presidential campaign is whether the part of this global war that began five years ago will be prosecuted to a satisfactory conclusion, or whether the effort to end the Iraq war will be marked by a different kind of waffling, whining noise than that one I heard at dawn five years ago, followed by more devastating explosions