Few in America will question the war in Iran
An explosion at the Naval Air Station, Ford Island, Pearl Harbour during the Japanese attack in World War II. Picture: Fox Photos/Getty Images
It is not easy to know what to make of California or indeed America. I can’t claim to know America, but if California can be taken as a microcosm of the United States, then my statement stands and it is not easy to make a determination.
I suppose I would not be the first person to find that California is complex. The war in Iran does exercise minds in the sense that the , the and the television news give it an occasional headline. Very often that headline competes with a headline on whether or not a California brand ice cream can become a national brand. Mergers in Hollywood command as much importance as the war.
The fact that the US is at war (or as Mr Trump suggests is engaged on a necessary military operation - Epic Fury, no less!) does not seem to engage the minds of people. Perhaps it is because America is so used to such special military operations. Invading other nations to sort things out has become natural. That’s what happened in Venezuela and what will likely happen in Cuba. That’s what the military (and the navy and the air force) is there for. What’s the point of having such an outsize military if you don’t create work for them?
Nobody here seems to question why Mr Trump was inveigled into war with Iran by Netanyahu. Everyone seems to accept that Iran was almost ready to unleash a nuclear attack on America, so it had to defend itself. The Democrats, who should hold the President to account, don’t question the war, they just question why the President ignored Congress before going to war. The people just seem to accept that it is their duty to sort out the world’s problems… even when those problems are mainly in their imaginations. It is a bit of a conundrum.
But make sense of this. Republicans in the US, following Mr Trump’s leadership and many of his leading Christian supporters and party acolytes were, last week, taking part in a marathon reading of the Bible to recognise the 250th birthday of the country. The event is to encourage “a return to the spiritual foundations that has shaped this country”.
“The Bible," according to Mr Trump (no doubt an avid reader!), “is indelibly woven into our national identity and way of life.”
No doubt it was the Bible, not King George’s tax, that encouraged the Sons of Liberty to dump the tea into the Boston harbour leading to the revolution that saw the colonists declare independence. And no doubt it was the Bible that prompted the Proud Boys to attack Capitol Hill in their bid to overturn the 2020 Presidential election that Joe Biden, according to Mr Trump, did not win.
It seems to me that Americans (those in north America) must be very insecure. They seem to think that everyone is intent on attacking and invading them. In fairness, Japan did attack the US at Pearl Harbour in 1941. The Japs attacked in what they regarded as a pre-emptive strike. The US was about to join World War II in Europe and, of course, that would have brought them into conflict with Japan. In the early days, Mexico was a bit of a thorn in the side of the US but their general Santa Ana was forced to cede Texas to the US after a couple of skirmishes. So really the US has never been under serious threat of attack/invasion, unless you count the USSR attempt to establish a military base in Cuba, in response to a CIA plot to oust Cuba’s leader Fidel Castro in the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The USSR, quite appropriately, also sought the removal of US strike missiles from Turkey.
The Brits, in their colonial pomp, did contemplate an invasion from Canada but were quickly dissuaded. Greenland, so far as I know, has not threatened the US but... So when you look at the evidence there has not ever been any serious threat against the US. On the other hand, there are plenty examples of the US engaging in conflicts in countries like Korea (not very successfully) and Vietnam (also not very successfully). In Iraq and Afghanistan, the jury is out on whether or not these interventions were successful.
And so, to Iran. There is hardly a rational person in the world who can see sense in Epic Fury. Iran’s pursuit of nuclear power was the excuse, but that was also the excuse used to attack Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
Like I said, it is not easy to figure out the people of America, the vast majority of whom seem very down to earth and practical. Like us, they worry about the cost of living and they are particularly exercised about the cost of gas at the pumps. Strange enough they have not taken to the barricades to force action from the government. Perhaps they have more sense. The military here would soon sort out any such nonsense.
It is not often that I would find myself in agreement with the outspoken Pat Spillane, but he hit the nail on the head when he commented recently about RTÉ’s coverage of Gaelic games. The quarrelsome Spillane took RTÉ to task for failing the GAA and was critical of the coverage given to the game. He quite righty took umbrage at the miniscule coverage afforded the “shock” victory inflicted by Leitrim over Sligo in the Connacht championship.
The great thing about the championship (as it once was!) is that there will always be upsets. There is always the chance that Leitrim will pull one over a more fancied Sligo. There is always the chance that Sligo could put one over Roscommon, that Galway would put one over Mayo. That’s what the championship is about or was, once upon a time.
The GAA itself must take some blame for the failure of the national broadcaster to showcase the game. The squeezing of the championship into a three-month timeframe does not leave much room for highlighting the lesser teams. And, as for Ladies Football, well that is an entertainment that is only for final days in Croke Park. Remember it is not so long ago that the Ladies final drew the biggest ever attendance to a (ladies) final in any sport. Ladies’ soccer and rugby abroad have drawn bigger attendances since, but Ladies Gaelic showed the way.
To come back to Spillane’s point. RTÉ’s coverage is pretty dismal. Ger Canning may have been a good commentator in his time, but he is past his sell-by date. He is no Micheál O Muircheartaigh. But then who is? He invariably fails to recognise a player’s contribution and mis-identifies players regularly. My eyesight is not great, but he confuses me. His regular analyst (don’t know why analysts exist on commentary!) Eamonn Fitzmaurice knows the game but allows his Kerry bias to come through too often and he is dull. Darragh Moloney knows his GAA but is infrequently used while Marty is Marty and is out of his depth once he is required to leave Clare.
When you look at the numbers in attendance at the different games the RTÉ coverage does not make sense. The coverage given by RTÉ to English Premier League soccer, which does attract big crowds, is quite staggering. Does anybody really give a damn if some unknown and unfathomable player from the bottom half of the championship has a crash (damaging his Porche) on the way to training? Yet RTÉ thinks such news must be reported. Because members of the Ireland team operate mainly in the English Championship there is an inordinate amount of time given to the competition. The League of Ireland must wonder what they must do to attract the attention of the national broadcaster. They have their Friday night games but little else. Perhaps the GAA needs to sex up it’s act. Old men in suits would need to become more casual. Maybe bring back Brolly and Pat.
- Anon
