http://theconversation.com/the-five-point-plan-used-to-justify-fighting-wars-is-being-deployed-in-media-again-32348
Quote:
If you look back at recent conflicts, and those in the Middle East in particular, the same arguments are made. There is essentially a five-point plan that can be used to justify foreign intervention of most kinds.
This is a fascinating article, I'd suggest that the publicity planners in government are aware of a basic model like this (I've heard of similarly structured approaches to "change management", and obviously similar is Naomi Kleins analysis of the shock doctrine).
What the article leaves out, is the notion of worthy/unworthy victims. We don't hear, or at least without much prominence, about similar insurgencies to the ISIS mob: Libya, Mali, Congo, South Sudan, Mexico (and until recently, Sri Lanka), all of whom could provide an example of atrocity to satify stage one.
Stage five is necessary for many reasons, a legal fig leaf to suggest war is about self defence, and also as an ideological tool, to maintain a pretence of unwillingness to go to war.
In the drumbeat of war, we could ask: why is Syria always higher up the agenda than Ebola? Which battle: ISIS or Ebola will save more lives, do more good? Our rulers show their priorities very clearly.