Whack-A-Mole
Our own Mark Collins, fighting ignorance one letter to the editor at a time:
Every time this misinformation pops up, he whacks it back down again. Thanks for fighting the good fight, Mark.
It is most unfortunate that the mythical "invasion" of Afghanistan has become common currency among journalists – and this is no mere semantic quibble.
Describing what the United States and Britain did in Afghanistan as an "invasion" tends to equate those actions in people's minds with the real invasion of Iraq.
That equation implicitly and wrongly calls into question the legitimacy of NATO actions in Afghanistan, which have been authorized unanimously by the UN Security Council.
Every time this misinformation pops up, he whacks it back down again. Thanks for fighting the good fight, Mark.
posted by Babbling Brooks at 2:07 p.m.
1 Comments:
The 2003 "invasion" of Iraq was in fact authorized by the terms of the original 1990 UN Security Council resolution, and the sequential subsequent 16 resolutions.
Unless one considers Saddam's 16 breached Security Council resolutions - upon which the 1991 ceasefire was based - as no grounds for military action, in total contradiction to the original Security Council-authorized military action.
And that's not even getting into the moral dimension of the Coalition's liberation of the Iraqi people.
Post a Comment
<< Home