Sunday, April 9, 2017

Paul McGeough: History Overboard

Paul McGeough's "analysis" in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald is a perfect example of the appalling history overboard school of journalism so lucidly described by Peter Hitchens in my last post.

Here's McGeough's opener:

"If there was a selfish, inward-looking core to Donald Trump's election-winning 'America First' philosophy, it took a backseat to human decency on Thursday, when the President ordered a swift and stunning missile assault on a Syrian air base as punishment for a poisonous gas attack that killed more than 80 civilians this week." (Syria's complex fight is now more complex)

Not only is Syria's guilt assumed, but the hitherto reviled Trump is deemed to have finally done the decent thing by unleashing his missiles! Next thing you know, McGeough will be hailing Trump as 'presidential'."

Some more McGeough gems from the same piece:

"But what happens next - how do Russia and Iran, patrons of the beleaguered Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad respond?"

McGeough's takfiri head-choppers are everywhere on the defensive in Syria, yet it's Asad who's "beleaguered"?

"Compared with 2013, when President Barack Obama failed to act on his 'red-line' to the Damascus regime that Washington would launch military strikes against the regime if it used chemical weapons - but didn't... "

No mention, of course, that Obama "failed to act" for the very best of reasons - Asad hadn't, in fact, crossed his red-line. (See my 8/4/17 post Why Obama Didn't Do What Trump Has Just Done.)

"[Secretary of State Rex] Tillerson, cold-heartedly, insisted that it was up to the war-ravaged Syrians, not the US, to decide Assad's fate."

Unbelievable! If only George W Bush's Secretary of State, Colin Powell, had "cold-heartedly" declared that it was up to the Iraqis, not the US, to decide Saddam Hussein's fate!


Grappler said...

What a scumbag! Several civilians killed in a nearby village from the Tomahawk attack but this is "human decency"?

Even the repulsive Liz Sly is reporting results of Coalition air attacks in Iraq - but Paul McGeough presumably has nothing to say about this:

337 claims of deaths are assessed as being "fair" - strange usage of the word - that means quite likely to have happened as reported. I note that when it comes to cases where the attacks are ascribed to Syria or Russia there is apparently no need for assessment. BTW these attacks in Iraq are "US-led" so may include Australian aircraft.

I saw somewhere (cannot find it now) that Belgium has withdrawn its contingent of fighters from the Coalition. This would mean that Canada, Denmark, and Belgium have all withdrawn. When will Australia do so?

Anonymous said...

The coverage by the Oz media of Syria have been at worst biased, and at best selective, however there seems to be no stopping the mad applause for this dangerous escalation. What is wrong with this country, we applaud one form of violence whilst loudly decrying another? Where are the voices for peace?

Anonymous said...

But surely Obama did act: he brokered an agreement with Russia whereby Syrian stocks of chemical weapons were surrendered. This is a far better result than inflicting some infrastructure damage by bombing. I mean Obama was involved in getting rid of the chemical weapons. Or is it that you can only be considered to have 'acted' if you bomb.

As for Obama's words regarding the use of chemical weapons being a red line; my recollection is that Obama said something along the lines that the use of chemical weapons would lead him to reconsider his stance of not directly entering the Syrian conflict. To reconsider is just that - it is not an undertaking to necessarily change a stance. Its to reconsider.

And what has happened to Paul McGeough; I have always found him to a reasonable commentator.