Wonderful article on iraq war

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by dravo, Aug 4, 2004.

  1. dravo
    Online

    dravo Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    The forgotten victims of the war in Iraq
    By Derrick Z. Jackson

    LAST WEEK at the White House, President Bush marked the first anniversary of the Iraq invasion by saying: "The murders in Madrid are a reminder that the civilized world is at war. And in this new kind of war, civilians find themselves suddenly on the front lines."

    There was no mention of Iraqi civilians killed by American bombs and bullets in the invasion and occupation.

    Bush went to Fort Campbell, Ky., to tell soldiers that they had liberated a nation "in which millions of people lived in fear, and many thousands disappeared into mass graves. That was the life in Iraq for more than a generation until the Americans arrived."

    The soldiers applauded. There was no mention of the civilian carnage caused by the arrival of the Americans.

    At both Fort Campbell and in another speech in Orlando, where the crowd chanted "USA! USA! USA!" Bush said America will do whatever it takes to defeat and destroy the terrorists "so that we do not have to face them in our own country."

    In his three speeches, Bush made no mention of the Iraqis who were permanently defaced.

    Bush cannot mention them because the invasion had no grounds. Neither weapons of mass destruction nor proof of an imminent threat was found. Bush cannot mention them because he knows a needless invasion was not worth up to 10,000 Iraqi civilians killed by US and British forces. He cannot mention them because it would only bring attention to the paltry and peculiar way the United States pays victims and the families of victims for the injuries and fatalities suffered at our hands.

    The New York Times featured Ali Kadem Hashem, who lost his wife and three children to a US missile. He received $5,000.

    "Part of me didn't want to take it," Hashem said. "It was an insult."

    Said Abbas Ahmed received $6,000 after losing nine members of his family. That works out to $667 per person.

    "This war of yours costs billions," Ahmed said. "Are we not worth more than a few thousand?" Just as troubling is that the US military has rejected 5,700 of the 11,300 claims processed. Of the 5,600 cases where claims have been paid, the total payout has been $2.2 million. That is an average of $393 per Iraqi victim.

    The families of American victims of 9/11 are receiving an average of $1.8 million per victim.

    Military officers in Iraq admit that the payouts can seem random, without reason. A Newsday piece featured Wafa Abdul Latif, the mother of a 12-year-old boy who was shot by US soldiers. Because of a curfew, US troops blocked an attempt by neighbors to rush the boy to the hospital.

    The boy died in the car. A US military official apologized for the shooting. The family was denied compensation.

    "When the Americans first came, Mohammad and my other children watched them with joy in their eyes," Latif said. "Now we hate them."

    Newsday and the Los Angeles Times reported on bizarre cases where people received more cash for damaged automobiles than for dead relatives. The family of Husham Sami was denied compensation despite the fact that the unarmed Sami was killed point-blank at his house by US soldiers who did not understand he was trying to desert Saddam's army. Sami's brother Kamel received $2,500 for his US-wrecked, 15-year-old car.

    "It is a strange form of justice," Kamel Sami said.

    Strange justice is a natural result of a strange and unjust war. At Fort Campbell, Bush said Iraqi civilians are seeing "the good heart of America." In the comfort of soldiers, he felt it was fine to inject some levity into his speech. He quoted a US female soldier who said she is one of the best shots in her battalion: "But hey, I'm a redneck, what do you expect?"

    There was laughter and applause. In Iraq, there is no yahoo laughter or applause in homes reddened by the blood of civilian victims of the invasion. In those homes, there are the perturbations of hate.

    Bush never fails to remind the rest of the world that 3,000 innocent Americans were killed on 9/11. Yet America refuses to count civilian casualties in Iraq. Bush still rails about a Saddam Hussein who "tortured children in front of their parents." Yet America stiffed thousands of Iraqis who watched family members burn and bleed to death because of our invasion.

    Bush says that unlike the terrorists, "We believe in the values that uphold the dignity of life." Yet the value America places on American victims of foreign terrorism is 4,580 times more than the average compensation for Iraqi victims of premeditated American violence. That gap and the ease with which Bush made redneck jokes with his soldiers is a stunning clue why he found it so easy to invade Iraq.

    Bush never put a human face on Iraqi civilians. That makes the invasion and occupation a failure, on face value.

    Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com.

    © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
     
  2. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    :hail: :hail: :happy2:
     
  3. DoubleT8600
    Online

    DoubleT8600 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Wonderful article. Did you sick bastards ban him for posting it? KERRY 04!!!
     
  4. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    Do not question the mods in the forums. Want to question Sir Evil's decision? Send him a PM.
     
  5. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    read the rules, then follow the thread, then ask a moderator in PM's.
     
  6. Shazbot
    Offline

    Shazbot Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2004
    Messages:
    175
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Houston
    Ratings:
    +7
    True, a thought provoking article...only problem is that the conclusions are all wrong. Here, we have another reiteration of the argument that the war had no grounds. Why? Because there is no evidence that there was an imminent threat.

    Now, it is possible that since I was living in Spain during the "war" with Iraq, that I received incorrect news as to why we went to war. However, I was never under the impression that there was any "imminent threat" from Iraq. A potential threat, yes. A danger to national security, yes. Risk that Iraq was about to attack us, no.

    As I understood it, after 9/11, we didn't only go to war against Bin Laden, or against the Taliban. We went to war against terrorism, as a whole, and throughout the world. What I saw in the news and on the internet was that Iraq had ties to terrorists, just like the Taliban did. Sure, Hussein was not directly affiliated with the 9/11 attack, but just like the Taliban, and a slew of other governments in the world, he did have connections to terrorists, and even allowed them asylum in his nation.

    Then, on top of that, I was seeing videos and satellite images detailing how Iraq was (very rapidly) dismantling suspected bio- and chemical weapons labs. I guess we could have been all wrong...maybe he was just dismantling aspirin factories. I mean, he couldn't let the Americans see his aspirin! It really is no wonder that his bio and chemical weapons are as yet unfound. How easy is it to bury that kind of stuff in a desert the size of Iraq? How easy is it to push it across a border to Syria? We knew they were there - everyone did - from the mid-1990's on. I guess we should have just taken Saddam's word for it, that they were destroyed, even without any documentation of it or proof whatsoever. :rolleyes:

    Let's not forget the incredible cost it was for us to go to actually go to war. Let's also not forget all the millions and millions of dollars that are being poured into Iraq. It all may not be going into the pockets of the civilian victims. Rather, we are investing it for them - building for them homes, hospitals, schools, and establishing a functioning government.

    Does anyone truly believe that it would accomplish anything to dwell on the civilian deaths in Iraq? Is it our place to go to Iraq and apologize for those deaths? I think not. It is a sad cost of war. Is it our place to honor their memory? Very much so. I think what we are doing right now in Iraq is an honor to all those innocents who died in the conflict.

    Let's talk about what the war was worth. Mr. Derrick Z. Jackson says the war wasn't worth the "10,000 Iraqi civilians killed by US and British forces." What about all those that died as the Allies bombed the daylights out of Berlin in WWII? A less bloody solution is always better, but not always practical or possible. How about all those Japanese that perished in the blasts of not one, but two atomic bombs. I guess we should have just stopped at Okinawa and said, "It's just not worth it to finish the job and invade Japan."

    How about we look at the other side of the coin. Let's say the conflict in Iraq was unfounded...based only on George W. Bush's desire for war. Do you really think it would have been worth it for him to attack another sovereign nation for fun? Would he really have thought it worth it to sacrifice America's credibility in the world (particularly Europe) over oil? Do you really think he would have considered it worth it to reject the views of the United Nations, to gain a little yet-to-be-seen money? You can argue that George W. Bush isn't the brightest bulb, but he's not stupid. The decision that was made may not have been the best solution available, but I support it. Why don't we give Bush a little credit for making a damn tough decision that neither you nor I would like to have made.

    -Douglas
     
  7. klusener
    Online

    klusener Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Omg, what an irony, when people are killed in your own country, you put them in your avatars (Kathienne) and you do so much for them, but you kill tens of thousands in other countries and you expect no retaliation and you ignore them as a byproduct of war!!!!
     
  8. klusener
    Online

    klusener Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    you talk so much about what good you are doing for their country, then why do you give majority of your contracts to American companies, why don't you let the Iraqi companies to have some of the contracts, you are saying you are doing all of this for them right??
     
  9. Shazbot
    Offline

    Shazbot Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2004
    Messages:
    175
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Houston
    Ratings:
    +7
    Where the hell did you get that?

    I guess you can show me evidence that these Iraqi companies were in the condition and had the capability to reconstruct their nation right after it was rocked with war. You also must take into account that it was because of our action that the damage was caused - we are taking responsibility for what our bombs did.

    -Douglas
     
  10. klusener
    Online

    klusener Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    what do you think was my point in "civilians death count" go to the first post..

    www.iraqbodycount.net, every death is accounted for, they have information on how the US killed every one and where for every one of those poor souls..
     

Share This Page