19 February 2003

More on the weekend's anti-war (pro-Saddam) marches:  once again, Andrew Sullivan is worth quoting at length: HOW I FEEL: A Times of London writer, Stephen Pollard, lets it rip today in words that certainly echo for me: In all my 38 years, I have never before felt such a sense of personal shock. I am shocked that so many of my friends would rather a brutal dictator remained in power — for that would be the direct consequence if their views won out — than support military action by the United States. I am ashamed that they would rather believe the words of President Saddam Hussein than those of their own Prime Minister. I am nauseated that they would rather give succour to evil than think through the implications of their gut feelings. It is a shocking experience to realise that your friends are either mindless, deluded or malevolent. He doesn't mince words, does he? And yet he's right. He's particularly good on the self-righteousness of the masses in London on Saturday, and their facile, asinine support for "peace": I have tried to point out that saying you are in favour of 'peace' is meaningless. Which sane person is not? The question is: peace on whose, and what, terms? If it is peace on the terms of brutal dictators, secured by allowing them to build up whatever weapons arsenals they wish, then that is not peace. It is suicide. Read the whole thing. Good points, I think.  He also points at another piece in The Times, more measured and less emotional, from Lord Rees-Mogg, making much the same points, which resonate for me: The demonstrators were not people who had opposed Saddam’s refusal to disarm under the terms of the UN ceasefire in 1991. They were not people who had marched against Iraq’s treatment of the missing hostages seized in Kuwait, or of the Iranian prisoners of war, or of Iraqi dissidents, or of the Kurds and Marsh Arabs. All of these things had passed them by. When the United States decided to act to enforce the UN resolution on disarmament, or to remove the regime, then, and only then, they decided to protest. Subjectively the march was for peace; objectively it helped Saddam Hussein. He knows that; the march was shown for seven hours on Iraqi television. It is certainly true that the marches were carefully observed, and favourably commented on in Baghdad.  I am firmly of the convition that the only hope of achieving peace in Iraq is by maintaining a credible threat of overwhelming force, and demonstrating the will to use it.  After all, thats how we've got as far as we have.   11:30:43 PM    comment []

Cricket World Cup Reflections There has been a little hiatus early this week, following SA's shocking loss to NZ on Sunday and the awful prospect of not qualifying for the next phase, with no matches on Monday, and only one game yesterday. I've been doing a lot of browsing on various web sites, catching up on things.  It is frustrating not being able to follow the key games on live TV, and of course, we are deprived of all the radio and TV  talk shows, but the web and snippets on CNN World Sport certainly give one a flavour for what is going on. The English papers were ecstatic that their pathetic, cowardly team eventually got onto the pitch, and saluted their stupendous victory over those European powerhouses of the game, the Dutch.  Latest news is that the brave English scraped past the African powerhouses of Namibia to register another unexpected victory. Predictably, there was an outbreak of "snot en trane" in the SA press (and a similar scene in India); how about this one from an anonymous correspondent hiding behind the pseudonym of "The 12th Man": I am an ocean of anger Johannesburg 17 February 2003 10:40 I have such a headache. I have such an excruciating headache. It has to do with Polly. It has to do with AD. It has to do with Boje. It has to do with Jakes. It has to do with Omar, Percy, Eric and every blinkered idiot this country has the gall to call cricketing experts. It has to do with the sad fact that despite having a year (since the last Aussie tour) to sort out the myth they call the South African bowling attack, nobody appears to have done a thing. And it has to do with the knowledge that despite being on home ground the Proteas are still going to screw things for this country, which so badly needs success. The bowling display produced by the South Africans in Johannesburg on Sunday has to go down as the worst I have ever seen, and let me hear one word about how fab Steve Fleming was, how rain affected the outcome of the game or the unfairness of the Duckworth-Lewis system, and I swear I will rip the instigator's throat out and eat it. Raw. Pulsing. So recently filled with life and food. I will rip his throat out and eat it. And then I'll hunt down his children and rip their throats out, just 'cos I can, and I'll eat them too. Raw. Yes.    etc....... Pretty straight talking, but probably sentiments and modes of expression which are widely shared back home.  Some very good points made also.  Polly's captaincy has been widely criticised, the bowlers, particularly Allan Donald, have been rightly castigated, and even the coach comes in for his share of criticism. I guess this is the pressure on the home team which was widely forecast before the tournament started.   Fanie De Villiers and Ray Jennings both vociferously believe that Donald should be dropped and Andrew Hall should be in the team (good point, at least he is a fighter and good team man). Meanwhile, the ghost of Hansie Cronje is swirling around and haunting the SA camp, further undermining the captain.  Come on guys, Hansie is dead and gone, may he rest in peace, and cannot help you now.  I think that Herschelle Gibbs should keep his mouth shut and let his bat do the talking, and that Allan Donald should join Jonty in dignified retirement.  It seems Pat Symcox agrees with me. And it is reported that the players are still haggling with the administrators over their pay packages.  How can this be?  Was Mark Boucher dreaming about negotiating strategies when that catch came his way from Stephen Fleming on 53?  Was Jonty thinking about moneybags when he broke his hand dropping a catch against Kenya?  All signs of dissension and lack of focus in the camp.  Meanwhile, there has been the unedifying spectacle of Percy Sonn, not for the first time, giving his impression of how to be the suave and perfect host: Staggering legless and trouserless among fellow dignitaries at Boland Park in Paarl, the president of the United Cricket Board of South Africa, Percy Sonn, brought a moment of unexpected levity to what has become a rancorous, shambolic World Cup..... 'Brother I am so fucking drunk I don't know where the fuck I am.' Bravo Percy!  What a diplomat, and a credit to his country.  The report, in The Observer, from which I lifted that snippet, by the way, was also a good summary of the first week of the tournament. So, is this a hopeless team, doomed to failure?  I would say that the boundary between victory and defeat is perilously thin in one-day cricket.  SA were defeated by the genius of Brian Lara in the first match (shades of World Cup 1996!), and if Boucher had hung onto that catch, in all likelihood Sunday's result would have been different, and the press and critics would have been exultant.  With three wins from three starts, SA would have been cruising into the Super Sixes.  I worry about Jacques Kallis, the world's top all-rounder, who has not yet been a factor, either with bat or ball.  Is he carrying an injury?  That foot injured in the nets? Let's hope that the team can maintain its focus, rally behind the skipper, find their form and consistency, and offer some real competition to those cocky Aussies.  The latest good news is that yesterday's match between West Indies and Bangladesh was rained out, and the points shared.  So the pressure is now equally on the Windies and the Proteas. 9:13:08 PM    comment []