Sunday, September 18, 2016

the castration option

In a column entitled "An obituary for the age of intervention?" writer Jonathan Marcus suggests:
Another fundamental criticism is the absence of any real thought about the aftermath of the conflict.
The report notes that "policy was not underpinned by a strategy to support and shape post-Gaddafi Libya".
The result, it says, "was political and economic collapse, inter-militia and inter-tribal warfare, humanitarian and migrant crises, widespread human rights violations, the spread of Gaddafi regime weapons across the region and the growth of Isil [so-called Islamic State] in north Africa."[emphasis added]
Do the emphasized words NOT apply to any Middle Eastern conflict in which the West has seen fit to dip its oar? Everyone seems to say "oops" later, only to turn around and employ the same tool box to the next inviting and revenue-positive adventure.

Strange how involuntary sterilization has been used in various places around the world (mostly on the poor or otherwise disentranchised), but I have yet to hear of a policy of involuntary castration on those who insist on waving the flag to the detriment of others who have to do the bleeding.

Cut 'em off early and often!


  1. Works for me, but you're asking those in charge to cull themselves. I'm pretty sure we don't have that clout.

  2. We, e.g. Singapore or I, may stand in solidarity with our partners such as the United States White House in face of recent acts of terrorism in New York. May one and all be well, happy, safe, and peaceful.