Scott Horton Interviews Patrick Cockburn

Scott Horton, December 09, 2009

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent, discusses the Iraq bombings that undermine Nouri al-Maliki’s claim of improved security in Baghdad, the US government spin machine that defines terrorist attacks as indicators of progress, the difficulty of fighting and winning wars against failed states, the marked decline in Iraq’s Sunni population and the strange US determination to pacify Afghanistan.

MP3 here. (35:18)

Patrick Cockburn was awarded the 2009 Orwell Prize for political writing in British journalism. He is the Middle East correspondent for The Independent and a frequent contributor to CounterPunch.org. Cockburn is the author of The Occupation: War, Resistance and Daily Life in Iraq and Muqtada Al-Sadr and the Battle for the Future of Iraq.

9 Responses to “Patrick Cockburn”

  1. Since we are structured/organized country, does that mean we would be an easy country to occupy? I really don't know for certain, but I have a hard time imagining that we would put down our guns and accept new outside authority. But I will succeed that we are a sheepish society by and large.

  2. America is indeed a nation of 'sheep' who have allowed the 535 members of Congress – TRAITORS, idiots and morons, crooks and thieves, perverts – to destroy the country while they live like kings and queens. We have been invaded by 20,000,000 illegal immigrants without any action by our sheep. We probably would be an easy country to occupy – how would any other country react to being invaded by 20,000,000 illegals? – probably NOT with open arms as we have.

  3. I don't know. Americans are pretty passive and conformist, over-all. For all the talk I've heard of "another revolution" in my lifetime, the gun-idolators mostly shoot their girlfriends. Augustus Caesar disguised his empire as a "restored" republic. All the republican offices and assemblies continued, but the real decisions were made in private.

  4. The US has always had mass immigration. US society and economy always needs lots of immigrants, educated as well as uneducated, now as much as in 1909. The complaining about immigrants today is pretty much like the complaining about my square-head grandfathers, 100 years ago.

  5. Don't forget that much of the immigration coming into the US the past years was due to the rising construction of mainly residential(commercial too) real estate during our "boom years" brought to you by our central bank and American government housing policies.

  6. [...] War Isn’t So Easy After All┬áby Patrick Cockburn [...]

  7. It is not at all true that the USA has "always" had mass immigration. There were spurts, followed by long pauses. The 1924 act virtually ended immigration until 1965 at least. America doesn't need any more immigrants today. America has plenty of people.

  8. I tend to think our empirical igmoes in DC see illegal immigration as a means of colonization without having to go thru the trouble/expense of military interventions/regime change for cheap labor.

  9. While I enjoy some of P. Cockburns writings I always find him difficult to understand in his interviews.

Leave a Reply