Bremner, Bird & Fortune and Iraq
Posted: Wed 08 Jan, 2003 8:35 pm
Anyone see this the other night? It's a sad indictment when the British public have to get info on Iraq (or at least get reminded of the history) from a TV programme on political satire. For the young un's: The middle east used to be a loose grouping of tribes ruled by the Ottoman Empire. After WWI the British drew lines in the sand and created Iraq (and other countries). Naturally, the locals were not best chuffed. As a result in 1919 Iraqi villages were bombed for the first time - by the British of course! However, this didn't work so the RAF asked for a supply of "gas bombs", so the British were the first to use chemical warfare in Iraq. I guess Saddam is just jealous and is trying to copy us?!?
The programme also discussed the very heavy personal interest/investment in oil companies that most of the senior yanks involve have.
Naturally, the creation of new Middle East countries with "friendly" sheiks put in charge wasn't a first. When Livingstone had "discovered" Central Africa there were no countries, just tribal lands. So in go the British and draw lines through the jungle in an area where there were 150 tribes speaking 79 different languages, and create present-day Zambia. (and the rest) Mainly so we could more easily exploit the mineral wealth and other assets. Not much concern for the locals, then. Easy to criticize in hindsight but it turned out a recipe for disaster in the future. Biggest problem in Zimbabwe (apart from Mugabe) is the conflict between the two main African tribes.
So much for our glorious Imperial past. I comfort myself that we did more good than harm but have to be honest and admit we got rich by exploiting less "civilized" people.
The programme also discussed the very heavy personal interest/investment in oil companies that most of the senior yanks involve have.
Naturally, the creation of new Middle East countries with "friendly" sheiks put in charge wasn't a first. When Livingstone had "discovered" Central Africa there were no countries, just tribal lands. So in go the British and draw lines through the jungle in an area where there were 150 tribes speaking 79 different languages, and create present-day Zambia. (and the rest) Mainly so we could more easily exploit the mineral wealth and other assets. Not much concern for the locals, then. Easy to criticize in hindsight but it turned out a recipe for disaster in the future. Biggest problem in Zimbabwe (apart from Mugabe) is the conflict between the two main African tribes.
So much for our glorious Imperial past. I comfort myself that we did more good than harm but have to be honest and admit we got rich by exploiting less "civilized" people.