Nationbuilding?


Flickng through channels I saw a report program on BBC2 (Newsnight on Friday), profiling an Iraqi guy from Faluja. He was in his late 20s, telling his story, pictures backing it up. His famliy had a Factory before the war, which was somewhat bombed out. He was detained as a potential Batist and held captive for couple of days with a bag on his head. He didn't quite like it.
He told about his girlfriend, who got a foreign pass so he would never mary the woman because than she would be tied down to Iraq and he doesn't want to do that to her. After all, anybody can die any time. His unlce died because of some bomb recently.
Now staying in Bhagdad, watching on TV his town shreded knowing that whatever left of his families posessions would be ultimately destroyed by the time the fighting is over. He kind of said that life under Saddam was better, because it wasn't an utter Chaos. There was torture and secret police and oposition crashed just like now. But back then there was security on the streets and a life to live he argues.

The finish line was what kicked me a bit.
'I hate to be an Iraqi' he said.

Some twentysomething, thirty American died in Falluja till now, so the casualties are about 10 times of that.

Americans too suffering - in considerable number - for what exactly?
Buidling a nation?!

The result is people who hate to be Iraqis?

Can anybody put forward an argument wihtout reasoning that the suffering of the innocent is innevitable to create a happy society?

It doesn't have to be inevitable. But because of evil people, who try their best to prevent it from happening, it sometimes is.

And I suppose those "evil people" are all non-americans...

I mean really, I almost puked my coffee today when I turned to a page of my local news paper which portrayed a picture of a 2-year Iraqi boy on a hospital bed. He was missing one leg. It was mutilated by American fire. My son is 3 years old. If that happened to him I dont know what I would but one thing is for sure: the army and the nation that was responsible would have nothing but my utter contempt and hatred.

Not that Saddam was much better either. The footage from that kurd village from the 80's with the twisted corpses on the streets.. it still enrages me. Makes you ponder the rotten depths of human soul. I make you appreciate all the more people who managed to change the world without violence.. Gandhi, M.L. King, Mandela..

In this particular situation and place, yes. More or less. Most Iraqis are not among these evil people either though.


You are naive if you didn't already know that innocent civilians die in a war by fire from both sides. This has always been the case and will always be the case. It is a given. That said, were the terrorists to stop what they are doing, not one single Iraqi would be harmed by fire from Coalition troops. The same can't be said for the situation if the Coalition troops were to leave Iraq.

Bah,

I know very well whats going on out there. Its just when its before your eyes and graphic it starts to get to you.

As usual, the toll is paid by the common man. American war machine is a brutal bastard as much as Saddams police was. Repeating the mantra "we do not target civilians" doesnt change the fact that Americans kill them by the thousands. That is something the Americans have to deal with someday, just like they had to do it with Vietnam (and in some cases they're still in denial). Not to mention the fact that most US soldiers who come back home are mentally scarred for life. Iraq right now is a hell hole of the worst kind and I pity the fools who have to live through it. And you have a bunch of middle-aged white men to thank for it. But since they hate faggots their people pardon their atrocities and give them another 4 years (well, atleast Powell had the balls to resign.. or maybe he couldnt stomach it anymore). Or atleast the people dont think about it (happy thoughts.. laa laa laa.. happy thoughts). Iraq has gone wrong in so many ways that its hard to even begin to fathom the incompetence of the US leadership.

What a bunch of inept bastards we humans are...

Bah

They were a lot more brutal and careless in WWII, but I never hear people whining about how the Americans and Brittish killing innocent French, Italian or German civilians and were just as brutal as Hitler's army.

Am I on your ignore list?


Returning back to the topic, I started laughing yesterday (laughter of despair) when I yesterday(?) saw an American commander of some sort on the news, saying that they had now "liberated" Fallujah. The reason for my reaction to this was that I knew that they had driven out in my guestimation at least 100 000 people in preparation for the offensive, making it very little to liberate, and the question was who it was to be liberated from.

No. Kreel is the only one, and I find myself often reading his crap anyway.

It was in reference to the comment about "noone complains about the British or Americans during WWII". But I recognise your problems about Kreel, and that's one of the two major reasons I don't have an ignore list: It would never work

Oh. Well, if you've written a post on that subject recently I just haven't noticed it, I guess.

Bar-Aram,

slipping away from the subject but anyway.
The brutality of WWII was probably what has eventually creatad the culture of valuing human life and denying war. People who lived trouhg that horror were the first advocted of such culture.

In the begining I didnt refer to civ casualities of fighting. But to 'casualties' of the situation. But I guess yeah, There are evil people.
And they ruin everyone's hapiness
mine too.

I think the basic fact to remember is:

Were the terrorists to stop what they are doing, not one single Iraqi would be harmed by fire from Coalition troops. The same can't be said for the situation if the Coalition troops were to leave Iraq.

True, but if all opponents (including the Coalition, other "terrorists" and rival supporters) submitted to one terrorist faction as well, not one single Iraqi would be harmed by gunfire.

But the different factions that would be left there if the Coalition troops leave (most of whom are not fighting right now) would be extremely unlikely to submit readily to each other, and at that point it is out of the control of the Coalition troops.

Yes, but my point was that what you really are saying, with a propagandic twist, is "If all non-X submit to X, then there would be no problems".

I'm saying we have two possible scenarios here. One party to the conflict gives up or the other party to the conflict gives up.

In one case the killing will immidietally end and no Iraqis will be killed, construction projects will go forth all over the country, and there will be democratic elections. In the other case, the killing will almost certainly not only go on but get worse, and the suffering of the Iraqi people will only intensify.

There are many more than two parties in most conflicts, let alone this conflict.


Whose democracy and whose elections? From my study from afar, I would say that it's most likely that the US is the main actor in creating the discourse.


I don't think that the "Terrorists" kill for fun, so I have a hard time seeing why they would kill once they have won.

Right now there are essentially two sides that are fighting each other. One of those sides could easily fragment if the other side was to pull out, but for now that side is united by having the same enemy. Sadr's people may be an exception, but they have stopped fighting anyway.




I'm not sure exactly what you mean here. Elections are scheduled for January.




Well, they would at a higher rate than Saddam in my estimate, but that's not what I mean. The Coalition troops pulling out would not mean those people would automatically come into power. They aren't even one homogenous group anyway.

What I mean is that the fighting would not end. The Coalition troops have one possible way of ending the fighting: winning. There is no other sure method available to the Coalition right now of creating a situation where Iraqis are no longer being killed in battle.

When the US got in World War 11 and they bombed places in Italy Germany and all over Europe many innocent civilians were killed but I didn't hear any complaining coming from Europe then. Maybe just maybe we have the guts to
do the right thing and get rid of a terrorist state while the rest of the world
sits on their asses and points fingers!