« Three trailer park girls go 'round an' 'round my insides, 'round an' 'round my insides, 'round an' 'round my insides! | Main | You Don't Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows »
i knew which side my bread was buttered
by mg at 09:56 AM on April 09, 2003
If you haven’t heard by now, Baghdad is pretty much “liberated.” Fighting will continue, but the war is pretty much over.
It’s been said here and elsewhere that the Iraqis didn’t want the coalition forces in their country. Well, if you’ve seen any of the video, the Iraqi people are dancing in the streets of Baghdad. I can guarantee you there wasn’t dancing in the streets of Warsaw when Germany invaded. I can guarantee you there wasn’t dancing in the streets of Saigon as the North Vietnamese Army invaded.
This, is, and always has, been different.
It may have come about by unfortunate means, yes, war is never the preferable option, but it was the only option. But this is the result of that last resort – what we are seeing today is equivalent to the Berlin Wall falling. The Iraqi people are tearing down statues of Saddam today, because now they finally can. Lets hope that in the days ahead they choose to guarantee those rights for their people.*
It isn’t the constitution in the United States that grants freedom; it is a basic human tenet. We are all granted certain unalienable rights, that no government can grant, or take remove from us. For years Saddam Hussein has tried to take freedom away from his people, and today they are finally realizing those days are over. The Iraqi people taste freedom today, for the first time.
The Americans brought tanks and bombs with them to Iraq, but they also brought freedom. The people in Baghdad today are chanting “America! America! America!” They are flowers to soldiers and laughing with them. The only Americans they are telling to go home today are the human shields. Say what you will about this war, and why it was started, but to the Iraqi people a U.S. victory means freedom.
* This, and whether democracy spreads in the Middle East as it did in the Soviet Block after East Germany fell, will be the true test of Bush’s foreign policy.
comments (29)
Considering how well American soldiers are being received in Baghdad, maybe the next place we invade should be San Francisco.
by mg at April 9, 2003 10:05 AM
Does this mean we all get free oil!? Yeeehaaaa!!
by Ezy at April 9, 2003 12:48 PM
"...but it was the only option" and the earth *is* flat, just look and see for yourself. We'll never know if it was the only option or not. And we won't be able to evaluate the overall outcome for some time. It certainly was *the* option. Though I'm happy to see happy Iraqis for now, it came at a great cost (the life of an Iraqi soldier does count for something, along with the American and other casualties). If the end justifies the means, I can think of a lot of ways to acheive happiness for people that would be "unfortunate" for some.
by chris at April 9, 2003 1:06 PM
Maybe you all at work, without access to a television, can't quite grasp how big this is. Watching the live coverage from Baghdad earlier this morning was incredibly moving. This moment that will be considered a turning point in history. Maybe. Hopefully it will. Anyway, there was one very funny thing, an Iraqi citizen had put up a sign that said "Go Home Human Shields."
It is really amazing - if you sat down and watched video from the the protests in the Bay area a couple days ago and the video from the streets of Baghdad this morning, you'd think you'd been told they were coming from the wrong places.
by mg at April 9, 2003 1:16 PM
"Though I'm happy to see happy Iraqis for now, it came at a great cost"
Yes, and I think if anyone has the right to say that the cost of the war was justified, it is the Iraqi people. I don't know about you, but from everything I've seen the Iraqi people are happy at the outcome, despite the consequences. If they are satisfied that what has happened was justified, what right do you have not to be?
by mg at April 9, 2003 1:19 PM
Chris, I will agree with you that there could've been a more diplomatic solution, but 12 years worth isn't enough? Granted, the US government might have waited for another 5 or 6 years until the nations, in the UN, who opposed the war, got fed up with Hussein's defiance and decided to act but to what cost? A more prepared Iraqi military? That would've ended up costing more lives, in my opinion. There still would've had to be the same march to Baghdad to take the city. Only then the coalition forces would've encountered a more dug in, better trained Republican Guard. I do hate that it came to war and Iraqi, British, Aussie, and American troops and civilians had to die but I think the freedom of any people, as a whole, is worth that.
by Ezy at April 9, 2003 2:02 PM
I didn't say I was dissatisfied with the outcome. Few will be dissatisfied with regime change in Iraq. The means for acheiving a particular end are always subject to question (e.g. I can cure your body of brain cancer by removing your head; society would be safer if all deviants were summarily executed, etc.).
A month ago if the universe came to me and said, "we can solve this problem right now: removal of Saddam and the location of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and all it will cost is the death of 100 Americans, 25 British subjects, 20,000 Iraqi men, a few journalists, an odd lot of civilians, and 20 billion dollars worth of human industriousness. Deal? All that for continued safety on American street corners. Sweet.
I know all the arguments, but I reach different conclusions. It's an underdetermined system with more variables than equations - thus many solutions are possible, we chose to follow one in particular, so it's water under the bridge. I took exception to the claim that war (er, pre-emptive attack) is the *only* answer. Diplomacy is not the only available answer either.
By the way, I'm not married, so the "right" to be satisfied or dissatisfied at things of my choosing is still something I enjoy :)
PS I'm glad you feel that way Ezy.
by chris at April 9, 2003 3:10 PM
Sure, there are plenty of arguements that could be made to why diplomacy should have been given more time. Tell those arguements to the 160 Iraqi children released from prison, or those who've had ears chopped off for dissenting, or those who've watched their wives raped in front of them for refusing to fight.
I was watching the news today and a BBC reporter was talking about being in a hospital in Baghdad. He said the general consensus there was that the suffering brought on by the war was worth it, that the future opportunities were worth the three weeks of bombings.
I can't argue against the idea that diplomacy may have worked. Eventually. But yesterday there was war and today there is freedom.
by mg at April 9, 2003 3:31 PM
My opinion is that it's too early to have an opinion. Don't the now deceased Iraqi solders have families? I would imagine we've killed possibly tens of thousands of them ... I would think their families would not be too keen on Americans right about now ... Did I mention the dead and wounded civilians and their families too?
I think one of the toughest things for an American to do at this point would be to put a shoe on the other foot ... From my understanding these Middle Easterners think radically different than we do ... So much that it's difficult to understand.
Am I stereotyping? Don't know ... But I've heard they don't like us on their holy land for any reason at all let alone invading. And isn't it all holy land over there?
Does anyone really know why we invaded anyway?
To free the oppressed Iraqi people? IMO, not worth one American Life. sorry.
To rid Iraq of WMD? When did they threaten us? Was it so urgent we couldn't wait 6 more months?
If there was a solid link to bin ladin, the 9/11 attack and sadam ... Hell, now that's a great reason ... I don't think there would have been any peace rallies if that was the case ... Not that the antiwar people would be behind invading, rather they would have been beaten down by the ones who still have strong feelings about 9/11 ... Which is pretty much the rest of us.
by The Rambler at April 9, 2003 3:31 PM
The violation of UN resolutions was the reason for going into the war. I never could get much behind that. If we were invading France because they were violating UN resolutions, I'd have been against it. But, there is a very compelling arguement to be made that even if we don't find a single WMD (which doesn't mean Iraq wasn't in violation of UN resolutions), the lives of the people in Iraq will be better than if we hadn't gone in, and that the pssibility of virulent democracy in the middle east will result in a better, more peaceful world. That is why I've always been behind the war, and why I'm much happier today, seeing a positive response to American troops, than I would ever have been if those same troops were to find a nuke somewhere.
by mg at April 9, 2003 3:37 PM
Now the fucking sand n's towelheads have even more of an excuse to be LAZY. Isn't it a work week? Why the fuck are they all dancing like it's a Vanilla Ice Concert? Go to fucking school and stop throwing sticks you little runt Iraqi children. Oh, you're going to just take over your father's HUMMUS stand? Huh? I thought Saddam was hiding behind the statue the whole time, shitting bricks, while Uday was ripping his own fingernails out and laughing at his own self-torture. Oh, yeah, let's see, oh, the world economy still sucks remember? In fact, it's gotten worse. Duh. Can't wait to see that initial claims number tomorrow. I can't wait to lose everything again, because all the fucking 30yr bond traders are a bunch of kniving faggots. I heard the price of Chemical Ali playing cards are now two Ali's per one Uday Hussein card. The happiest man in the world is Gary Condit. I repeat, Gary Condit.
by LOCKHEED at April 9, 2003 4:34 PM
What?
by mg at April 9, 2003 4:41 PM
Lock, did you forget the meds again?
by Ezy at April 9, 2003 5:03 PM
Okay, meds taken, immediate acting Ativan kicking in, Lockheed mood is giddy because just talked to fiancee as she wasn't mad at my sloppy trading today. So anyways, there was an IRAQI holding the sign: GO HOME HUMAN SHIELDS! I love it. Remember that guy UK? ha! ha! ha! Well, as for Nobody's Right if Everybody's Wrong a la Buffalo Springfield, at least one side is Less Wrong in this whole shabang. You think UK is ever going to post as UK here again? Oh, what an honorable man he was...UK is JA...and MIA, because he can't swallow his 'pride' which was so bogus in the first place. I bet you're alive UK. I'd bet my fiancee on it. And probably pondering suicide now, don't do it. JUST be a HUMAN SHIELD for North Korea. Go there now though, so you won't so perfectly time the flight right before the war, so you get landed in an American Friendly nation. If it's Japan, buy me a Gucci bag.
by LOCKHEED at April 9, 2003 6:44 PM
Yeah yeah meds etc. But look @ what he said earlier. Lock is making sense here, cuz these folks need to seize their chance to make smething of their lives right now.
by Anna at April 9, 2003 10:14 PM
mg's right; it's the afterwards that's important. I don't think there was ever any doubt anywhere which army would win. But how the city and country and people are treated now and in the near future, that's a balancing act a Flying Zambini brother (or a real family troupe, since I made that one up) wouldn't want.
One huge problem now is keeping it clear that religion is not the issue. Franklin Graham (who's evangelist Billy Graham's son, and an ardent Catholic [or Christian, whichever] and sort of rabid anti-Islam guy, and apparently a good friend of W.), wants to go into Iraq to provide humanitarian aid and incidentally explain how Christianity (or Catholicism) is really rocking and isn't it time they dropped their silly and backward religion. And that is *exactly* the wrong thing to do.
by Adam (L.) at April 10, 2003 9:18 AM
No kidding. I can imagine few things scarier than some religious zealot out there representing America to the newly liberated Iraqi people. Iraq has a had a reasonably secular government for years, I'd hate to ruin that with some radib Islamic backlash against rabid American Christianity.
by mg at April 10, 2003 4:03 PM
Hell, why don't we just send Jerry Falwell over, also, with his evil minions to "save" those barbarian's souls? Geez.
by Ezy at April 10, 2003 4:09 PM
Lockheed, the poster UK is actually my younger brother and so firstly I'll point out that he wasn't going as a human shield in the sense you're on about. He is actually an Aid Worker and will be helping to save lives, distribute aid and try to help the injured. He's alive, in Basra and from what I can glean from various sources was doing a good job so easy on the guy. You can try to put a man down but first walk a mile in his shoes. Would you have the guts to go there un-armed and ready to witness the horror he will have? Helping the old, injured and the dying? My brother he maybe but as a man I have the upmost respect for him, at the least he deserves that, don't you think? He is Anti War but he's not anti people like you and that's why he's there, willing to lay down his life for another, doing it peacefully, without a gun. Does that make him an asshole, no. Neither does he want to be a hero, he just wants to help people. So excuse me if I say "FUCK OFF!" to your comment. Man you're an racist asshole.
by o_O at April 11, 2003 3:23 PM
Ah. Well, I suppose that explains a few things. He was the one who claimed he was going to be a human shield, which, seriously, was just stupid. If it hadn't long ago slipped into the web ephemera I'd link to the article written by a couple human shields but returned home after speaking to Iraqi citizens and realizing all the awful thing that were really going on over there. Actually, did anyone see a lot of the feed from Baghdad on Tuesday morning? There was a woman yelling at some marines in English, calling them baby killers. Well, it turned out she was a human shield. I think it's ironic that a westerner who'd been in the country for only a few months chooses to berate the marines, while the Iraqi citizens were cheering them.
At any rate, I hope your brother is okay o_O. He wasn't particularly polite around this parts, but that doesn't mean he deserves to have a bomb dropped on him or anything. If you talk to him, send him my love. Or at least let him know I don't want him to die or anything.
by mg at April 11, 2003 4:15 PM
As MG stated, he was posting here that he was going to be a human shield. Personally, I wouldn't be there unarmed but have much respect for him. MG is also correct in the observation of your brother's manners. Oh hell, all of our emotions were running a little high, I think. Glad he's ok.
That does seem quite strange doesn't it MG. She'll, probably, have to shag ass home quickly though. Isn't the World Bank meeting soon? So many things to protest, so little time.
by Ezy at April 11, 2003 4:48 PM
What a cool discussion. I had avoided it previously for my own reasons. So let me just say that these are some well-presented arguments. And that I too hope UK is OK.
by Anna at April 13, 2003 6:40 PM
Maybe if I explain a little more what my brother means by the term human shield and I’ll use Basra since that’s where he is and this is pretty much what is happening there.
Imagine this, the Iraqi people for the most part can accept disruption as part of the shit that goes down with the war thing. For days now theirs hasn’t been adequate electricity, water and food going around. To us a few days might be no big deal we can cope. People already bordering on starvation cannot, you have a child a home, dying long before the coalition began bombing or took your town over. To you the Iraqi there the ones that are in charge, as the days go by your child is weaker still, fighting is still going on in the town, maybe even your street. Once the fighting pretty much stops your days into having not eaten, not washed and not even drank let alone the rest of your probably 6 or 7 people family. You venture out and encounter some coalition troops, first of your joyous that the tyrannical rulers are no longer in control, that feeling is fast superseded by a human will to live, to do that you need water, food and even medicine in some cases. You ask the troops about this and they are aggressive towards you, they don’t know if you’re an Iraqi troop, how can you prove otherwise? You in civilian clothes so are the Iraqi troops! Your desperation leads you to become aggressive back; further substantiating the coalition troops fears that you’re in fact a Saddamist. Your not of course but the desperation you feel for your family and yourself makes it so the guns don’t matter anymore, your not frightened of them because hell your that desperate. Now in comes the human shield factor, GI Joe there is just looking for you to give the reason, the reason just expel you from your life, hell he’s already seen his best mate blown up (maybe), he’s not trigger happy but you might be the one to make him. My brother steps in; he’s the human shield that knows the desperation on both sides, the Iraqi desperate to save his family, tired, hungry not thinking rationally anymore, emotionally drained from the shit he’s seen, a time bomb of aggression because in his eyes things are now worse (even if only for a short period) then when Saddam was in power and the Soldier, tired, probably hungry, emotionally drained from the shit he’s seen to. They probably don’t even speak the same languages, miss-communication easy happens here, sometimes leading to trigger pulling. My brother is there to step in, he speaks both languages, he can mediate between the two, perhaps solving the problem, “lets get the water truck in here, it’s most needed here or there”, wherever, whatever. You see that’s a real human shield to my brother, not some fool that sits ready to be bombed, what good is that doing? Saving nobody’s life whatsoever. He doesn’t need to be there, he’s there on his own free will, but what would happen if people like my brother weren’t there? It’s real easy to see how people can die, events cascade into stupidity and death based on nothing other than miss-communication and emotions running high on both sides.
That’s a real human shield that can make a difference to a whole lot of people.
Yeah sometimes my brother is what some would consider rude, however he’s straight on the mark where a lot folks won’t tread. He’s passionate about his views, many mistake it for rudeness or sometimes arrogance but he knows his stuff because he has first hand experience of it and is damn good at what he does. Without people like him I believe the death toll of war would be much greater. A lot of people busy themselves with the damage the initial war brings but it’s the after effects that continue on, people like my brother are there from before the start to long after finish, long after the troops go home.
I’ll pass regards on.
Peace.
by o_O at April 14, 2003 11:44 AM
Well why the fuck did he say he was going as a Human Shield? I went to the West Bank in January to get some aid work done, armed with a Hebrew/Aramaic dictionary and a shitload of MONEY, which I'm having a problem writing off as a tax deduction and now I'M FUCKED. So, I did walk at least a 'little' in your brother's shoes, course he hasn't walked a lot in mine either. Now, I've spoiled it. Lockheed is indeed a People Hater, but Alex isn't. AND O_o my deepest apologies, but I recall never bashing UK, until he bashed Me. Same goes for never bashing You, until you bashed Me. I'm the youngest brother in my immediate family. I know the unconditional love my brothers' feel for me. AND for that reason alone, I APOLOGIZE. I lied to them about going to the WEST BANK, I said I was going skiing in Switzerland. Tell you the truth, I'M A DUMBASS like UK, your KID BROTHER, so ASSHOLE PASSIONATE about COMPASSION, THAT I KICK MY OWN ASS AND MAKE THE PEOPLE who LOVE me WORRY. Um. So I'm sorry. As for the Bogroll, it still goes down your fucking throat. P.S. have no IDEA how the 'racist' thing came into this. NOT that Lockheed cares.
by LOCKHEED at April 14, 2003 5:17 PM
I give up.
by o_O at April 15, 2003 3:14 PM
It's usually advisable to give up rather than try to debate anyone who refers to themselves in the third person.
by mg at April 15, 2003 3:33 PM
Not only in the third person, but also with 2 different names.
by Linz at April 15, 2003 3:46 PM
I give up too. Someone come and take me away.
by Osama at April 15, 2003 3:57 PM
Osama, is Saddam with you?
by Ezy at April 15, 2003 4:09 PM