{"id":68130,"date":"2006-10-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/10\/25\/personne-ne-veut-dire-lamere-verite\/"},"modified":"2006-10-25T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2006-10-25T00:00:00","slug":"personne-ne-veut-dire-lamere-verite","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2006\/10\/25\/personne-ne-veut-dire-lamere-verite\/","title":{"rendered":"\u00abPersonne ne veut dire l’am\u00e8re v\u00e9rit\u00e9\u2026<\/em>\u00bb"},"content":{"rendered":"

Le New York Times<\/em> soutint la guerre contre l’Irak. Il lui trouva toutes les vertus, celles de la force comme celles de la civilisation. Il arrangea pour cela les nouvelles, la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 et les perspectives. A l’occasion de l’Irak, le New York Times<\/em> nous montra jusqu’o\u00f9 pouvait aller dans la mise en sc\u00e8ne d’une r\u00e9alit\u00e9 factice le porte-drapeau proclam\u00e9 et auto-proclam\u00e9 du lib\u00e9ralisme de l’esprit habill\u00e9 du s\u00e9rieux du professionnalisme qui caract\u00e9rise l’auto-description de la sph\u00e8re anglo-saxonne de notre civilisation. Le New York Times<\/em>, avec sa r\u00e9putation, est l’une des premi\u00e8res victimes de cette catastrophe historique qui se nomme l’Irak et ce n’est pas la pire nouvelle.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tC’est donc une am\u00e8re ironie que son \u00e9ditorial du 24 octobre soit repris un peu partout, notamment par The Independent<\/em> de ce jour<\/a>, comme exemplaire de la description de cette catastrophe historique dans toutes ses tragiques dimensions et de la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 d’en prendre conscience. Aujourd’hui, l’establishment<\/em> de la plus vaniteuse et la plus pr\u00e9tentieuse puissance de l’Histoire est dans un \u00e9tat qui doit \u00eatre d\u00e9crit comme proche de la panique, alors qu’approche ce que d’aucuns nommeraient curieusement le verdict des urnes (comme si les \u00e9lections du 7 novembre pouvaient changer quelque chose \u00e0 la situation en Irak). L’\u00e9ditorial du NYT, tel que repris par ses confr\u00e8res et repris par nous-m\u00eames, m\u00e9rite citation et aura sa place dans la description de l’effondrement auquel on assiste. Le grand journal, en faisant une fois de plus la le\u00e7on aux autres, s’adresse \u00e0 lui-m\u00eame la plus cinglante des le\u00e7ons.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abNY Times extract: No one wants to tell the bitter truth. This is an edited extract from an editorial in yesterday’s New York Times’<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbNo matter what President Bush says, the question is not whether America can win in Iraq. The only question is whether the United States can extricate itself without leaving behind an unending civil war that will spread more chaos and suffering throughout the Middle East, while spawning terrorism across the globe…<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIt is very clear that even with the best American efforts, Iraq will remain at war with itself for years to come, its government weak and deeply divided, and its economy battered and still dependent on outside aid. The most the United States can do now is to try to build up Iraq’s security forces so they can contain the fighting… and give Iraq’s leaders a start toward the political framework they would need if they chose to try to keep their country whole.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe tragedy is that even this marginal sort of outcome seems nearly unachievable now… At this point, all plans to avoid disaster involve the equivalent of a Hail Mary pass. In America, almost no one even the administration’s harshest critics wants to tell people the bitter truth about how few options remain on the table, and about the mayhem that will almost certainly follow an American withdrawal unless more is done…<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbRight now, the best place to express bitterness about what may become the worst foreign policy debacle in American history is at the polls. But anger at a president is not a plan for what happens next.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbWhen it comes to Iraq, the choices in the immediate future are scant and ugly. But there are still a few options to pursue, and the alternatives are so horrible that it is worth trying once again as long as everyone understands that there is little time left and the odds are very long.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 25 octobre 2006 \u00e0 05H36<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Le New York Times soutint la guerre contre l’Irak. Il lui trouva toutes les vertus, celles de la force comme celles de la civilisation. Il arrangea pour cela les nouvelles, la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 et les perspectives. A l’occasion de l’Irak, le New York Times nous montra jusqu’o\u00f9 pouvait aller dans la mise en sc\u00e8ne d’une r\u00e9alit\u00e9… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[6045,857,3256,2852,5445,3257],"class_list":["post-68130","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-catastrophe","tag-irak","tag-new","tag-times","tag-verite","tag-york"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68130","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68130"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68130\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68130"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68130"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68130"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}