conflicting strabismus

(BRUSSELS2) The eyes of the media have a certain converging strabismus. There are conflicts that we "like". In Donbass, will the nice Ukraine (in blue) be able to survive the returning Russian ogre (in red)? Following the next number. In Kurdistan, will the nice Kurds (in yellow) finally receive the help of their sworn enemies the Turks and will the planes of the American-Arab coalition arrive in time - like the cavalry in the far west against the Indians - against the villains of the day "the Islamic state"? Nobody dares to say it. But the next decapitation will give a boost to our media excesses.

And there are conflicts, which we don't care about, but then, like the first shirt. We don't even know they exist anymore. In Congo, for example, in North Kivu, the violence continues. A village attack on the village of May Moya, in North Kivu, killed 7 people on October 7, and several inhabitants were kidnapped, according to the European Humanitarian Aid Office. Nothing or very little. In Kashmir, tension has been rising for several months already. The ceasefire has been violated. 5 Indians and 4 Pakistanis died. Dozens more were injured. Nothing neither. South Sudan is facing a serious humanitarian crisis. And the main conflicts with or in Sudan are still not settled. In Yemen, the conflict is deepening between the different parties involved. In an almost generalized indifference, etc.

It is the law of the genre, where a certain political strabismus conceals certain conflicts and highlights others.