I don't want to get all political here, but I was very proud of the actions of my adopted country in taking a hospital ship into Misrata in Libya to rescue more than 250 badly wounded people waiting there. Also, I read that doctors from Medecins Sans Frontieres have been risking their lives to get badly wounded people onto ships for treatment. It's easy to bombard from the air but it take real heroes to pick up the pieces on the ground. But the worst thing was, the ships had been refused permission to enter harbour for days. In the end, they brought in fighter planes from the Turkish Air Force, which escorted the ship. Surely missions like this should get more publicity and support? But there's hardly been a mention in the press. There are still thousands of people, including kids with amputations, waiting to be taken away, and the water has been off there for days. The reporting on the Libyan conflict sucks. There are major human issues at stake here people should hear about. End of rant.
Regret to say these laudable actions have not made much of an impact back here. The mind of the nation is elswhere: an uncouth, working class male swore at his place of work.
The human side of war is rarely covered during the conflict itself which in many ways is probably the right thing. If it was you wouldn't be saying it is easy to bombard from the air. Those involved directly in that will suffer for it - it isn't easy for them. However nor is it great that we know about it right now.
The UK is a democracy - the human side of war being covered will affect votes. Parts of Scotland are heavily affected by this and there is an election due here. There will always be civilian casualties in war - war is unpleasant and nasty. Those taking the decisions need to be able to take the quickest least painful path. The moment the planes left it was not going to be pain free. I knew that the night I heard them leave. Just like the men and women in the military and the issues they face won't be shown either. The town I live in is more than aware casualties can just as easily happen on both sides in an aerial conflict, and that the men fighting can come back deeply affected. It isn't that long ago the Nimrod crashed taking 14 men from a little village here. Planes have gone from here - there is a chance they may not come back. To say it is easy for anyone personally involved in a conflict is wrong. Unlike previous generations the children of the personnel have to face constant news bombardment - not sure they need to watch what is happening exactly either. Especially since a lot of the personnel going out are facing a lot of other issues right now like coming back to unemployment and having to move house etc Two of the bases that have been strategic in this are facing closure. Maybe after the May elections in Scotland but before that I do not think decisions in war should be made with those in mind. It maybe a smaller number of casualties now will save a long and protracted conflict. We haven't got the military to take on another one.
This sort of thing is never likely to draw much media interest. (Unless of course there's a handful of Britons among those being helped..for as we all know one Briton equals sixteen Frenchmen and about six hundred and forty strangely coloured Africans.) The suffering being relieved is the sort of humdrum suffering that arises during conflict. The relief effort itself is evidence of that sort of courage and human effort that is most sublime, and most useful, but that is unspectacular and not likely to grab viewers, listeners, readers. Do the people - us lot - get the media they deserve?
Yes--but the whole point of risking British service people's lives was BECAUSE of the human suffering caused by the regime against the 'rebels'.
I have just ordered Peter Sissons' autobiography lol Tell you afterwards. Our media isn't that bad - having spent time in the US I wouldn't be about to trade it. Nor is it perfect. We will hear the stories of courage but they usually come out after the conflict is over - they will be reported on Channel 4 news, Newsnight, Panorama, Dispatches, Mark Thomas' website etc. Also now we are online we can always go to other places to find them now I personally feel we have a good level for during a conflict. However the media has a powerful influence and its responsiblity should be to the military and the families that go out from the UK above and beyond the people in Libya. I should add that I am a pacifist even wear a white poppy in November but I also believe if our country puts people in danger they should be supported - and not have to come back to media bombardment about the number of casualties. There are lots of reasons to keep the human element out during conflict. I may change my mind once my book has arrived Which is why we shouldn't be risking their lives (those in the military) further by making the decisions taken in combat political - ultimately a quick war is better for those suffering in Libya as well - a longer war will mean more casualities. Let the generals and politicians take the decisions it is never going to be right but now we are there they can't afford to be affected by being trashed in the polls in May. Conflict = Casualities. I am curious though how you know which side is causing them all ? The holes in a building that one group shown on the news here claim came from aerial bombardment almost certainly didn't - they were bullet holes.
Umm..but the ostensible reason for taking action does not render humdrum, predictable suffering any more spectacular.
