The Battle for Iraq - Ethnic Cleansing part deux
POSTED BY: rue
UPDATED: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 14:42
VIEWED: 6194
PAGE 5 of 5
ConnorFlynn- please don't take my comments as criticism of the enlisted, I'm only pointing out their horrific situation... just pretty pink pieces whirling in a blender. Iraq is FUBAR because of the very top of the chain of command. Even the generals know its FUBAR, but they don't have the authority to change things. Only the politicos have that power. But they're too busy stroking each other to notice the damage that they're doing.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer, I had an AHA moment. I think I realized why you and I will prolly never agree, and I'll use "dead checking" as an example of how we differ.
I find it an abhorrent practice. To pump a couple of rounds into a helpless person, shrug and walk on is a stunning example of callousness I'm not sure I want to see in our returning soldiers. A ethically strong soldier would be damaged, a morally flimsy one could be a danger in civilian life. But sometimes factors accumulate - the soldier hasn't slept for 24 hours, the situation is dangerous, the practice is accepted in his unit- warranted or not I can sympathize with the soldier. I can even understand that in grave circumstances of national self defense, when troops may be temporarily undermanned and don't have the luxury of attending to "details", it can be necessary.
But that's not enough for you, I think. It's not enough to understand, sympathize, sometimes even accept. You want me to BE THAT WAY. You want me to metaphorically pump a couple of rounds into Iraqi victims, shrug, and walk away. That way, we don't have to feel responsibility. Our image of ourselves as "good people" stays bright and shiny, untarnished by guilt and regret.
BTW, just as an aside- soldiers are NOT "ordered" to dead check. The military command is too smart for that. I can't remember the term they use- it's stronger than a "suggestion" but less than an "order". But that way, the culpability goes to the individual soldier. Talk about letting them twist in the wind...
----------------------
On balance and not being able to forget that Iraqis are human beings too, I find our purpose in Iraq simply doesnt' justify the moral cannibalism that our soldiers endure. If we had good motives for invading Iraq, those motives didn't even survive pre-war planning. EVERYTHING was up for contracts, so while our unarmored soldiers were rationing water, down to one MRE a day and getting blown apart, Kellog, Brown & Root was making a fortune. It was more important to the CPA to buy whole generating turbines from GE, necessitating a complete plant rebuild (unfinished) than repairing the French and Russian-built power plants in Baghdad. The oil revenues and nationalized industries that should have been handled in a transparent fashion until the day they could be handed over to the Iraqi government were looted. Meanwhile, our enlisted were supposed to patch over these crimes by handing out candy and painting schools.
In short, I can't find a shred of evidence supporting the notion that the Administration goal was ever to make Iraq an independent, functioning democracy because they have done just about everything possible to torpedo that reality. I don't know what YOU call it when people place American soldiers in harm's way for something other than the defense of the United States, but I know what I call it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer, I had an AHA moment. I think I realized why you and I will prolly never agree, and I'll use "dead checking" as an example of how we differ.
I find it an abhorrent practice. To pump a couple of rounds into a helpless person, shrug and walk on is a stunning example of callousness I'm not sure I want to see in our returning soldiers. A ethically strong soldier would be damaged, a morally flimsy one could be a danger in civilian life. But sometimes factors accumulate - the soldier hasn't slept for 24 hours, the situation is dangerous, the practice is accepted in his unit- warranted or not I can sympathize with the soldier. I can even understand that in grave circumstances of national self defense, when troops may be temporarily undermanned and don't have the luxury of attending to "details", it can be necessary.
Googling "dead checking", every Iraq-related reference I find is based on un-attributed quotes in a Village Voice article by Evan Wright.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0447,wright,58644,1.html
If it was actually a wide-spread practice, I'd expect to have more than one source.
Quote:
But that's not enough for you, I think. It's not enough to understand, sympathize, sometimes even accept. You want me to BE THAT WAY. You want me to metaphorically pump a couple of rounds into Iraqi victims, shrug, and walk away. That way, we don't have to feel responsibility. Our image of ourselves as "good people" stays bright and shiny, untarnished by guilt and regret.
Not at all. I'd just like you to stop demonizing American forces by labeling almost every action they take as an "Atrocity", and harping on them incessantly. Every once in a while you say you're not trying to do this, but the rest of your retoric belies your protestations. It would also be nice if you got a clue about the actual tactics of the insurgency. That's where you'd find your atrocities.
You repeat one instance of "Shooting a wounded man point-blank" ad nauseum, yet ask me to verify every single instance of insurgents executing prisoners, blowing up innocent civilians, etc., despite the fact that you can hardly turn on a TV or open a news site without hearing about another car bomb or group of bound prisoners shot in the head.
Quote:
On balance and not being able to forget that Iraqis are human beings too, I find our purpose in Iraq simply doesnt' justify the moral cannibalism that our soldiers endure. If we had good motives for invading Iraq, those motives didn't even survive pre-war planning. EVERYTHING was up for contracts, so while our unarmored soldiers were rationing water, down to one MRE a day and getting blown apart, Kellog, Brown & Root was making a fortune. It was more important to the CPA to buy whole generating turbines from GE, necessitating a complete plant rebuild (unfinished) than repairing the French and Russian-built power plants in Baghdad. The oil revenues and nationalized industries that should have been handled in a transparent fashion until the day they could be handed over to the Iraqi government were looted. Meanwhile, our enlisted were supposed to patch over these crimes by handing out candy and painting schools.
In short, I can't find a shred of evidence supporting the notion that the Administration goal was ever to make Iraq an independent, functioning democracy because they have done just about everything possible to torpedo that reality. I don't know what YOU call it when people place American soldiers in harm's way for something other than the defense of the United States, but I know what I call it.
If you have problems with the conduct of the reconstruction, or oil money going missing, or other malfeasance, by all means talk about that and you'll get no argument from me. I only have a problem with your depiction of the American combat forces.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I look at it this way... We're taught by our mainstream religions that life is sacred. Our Constitution, based on the Enlightenment, holds the right to life as the most important. Murder, in civilian life, is the ultimate crime.
When you send young people into war and you expect them to violate everything you have taught them is right and decent, you need at least give them a bullet-proof reason. Not a grab-bag of rationalizations, but an honest reason to kill. Otherwise, you risk creating hollow-eyed vets who can't even answer the question "why". Or you risk creating vets for whom killing is no big deal.
So, I keep asking "why" and I can't come up with a good reason, either by examing what our Fl;s say or what they do. Which means to me that they are willing to damage thousands of young people for no reason whatsover.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I look at it this way... We're taught by our mainstream religions that life is sacred. Our Constitution, based on the Enlightenment, holds the right to life as the most important. Murder, in civilian life, is the ultimate crime.
When you send young people into war and you expect them to violate everything you have taught them is right and decent, you need at least give them a bullet-proof reason. Not a grab-bag of rationalizations, but an honest reason to kill. Otherwise, you risk creating hollow-eyed vets who can't even answer the question "why". Or you risk creating vets for whom killing is no big deal.
So, I keep asking "why" and I can't come up with a good reason, either by examing what our Fl;s say or what they do. Which means to me that they are willing to damage thousands of young people for no reason whatsover.
Well..unfortunately War usually doesn't have a bullet-proof reason for someone.
Personally, I'm doing my best to look at the war as a good thing for the Iraqis eventually. No more Saddam isn't a bad thing. I look at the administration's handling and selling of the Iraq war as complete @#$%@ bullshit. They really played alot of us (including myself) as gullible constituents, taking advantage of our emotions after 9/11, not taking into account that that would eventually backfire. Instead of coming to us with the real reasons they went into Iraq..i.e. establishing a base in Iraq (Per the PNAC ), they sold us on the incredible stockpile of WMDs. Mark my words..we as a people won't be eating their words like candy anymore.
I'll be the first to say..I will NEVER TRUST a government official again period.
However, Our enlisted folks for the most part believe in what they are doing because they see for themselves the reactions from the "Majority" of the Iraqi people. Their initial mission to take Iraq is done. Now they are doing the good stuff in trying to rebuild and aid the Iraqis. That doesn't say that the killing and fighting of Sunni Iraqi/Foreign insurgents and what not doesn't affect them (Our enlisted folks). It was the whole reason I posted the "Smiles from Iraq" topic. Ultimately, our troops will be remembered as having done something great for the world and the Iraqis..hopefully they won't be remembered posthumously.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer- Just because an incident (say, shooting a wounded Iraqi) is understandable, perhaps even necessary, does not make it any less of an atrocity. Preventing some deaths does not make the remainder less consequential, both for the Iraqis and for us. I hold the administration entirely responsible. I think that is as close to a common understanding that we are likely to get.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer- Just because an incident (say, shooting a wounded Iraqi) is understandable, perhaps even necessary, does not make it any less of an atrocity. Preventing some deaths does not make the remainder less consequential, both for the Iraqis and for us. I hold the administration entirely responsible. I think that is as close to a common understanding that we are likely to get.
But I don't consider that particular instance an atrocity. I consider it a sad event which occurred in the heat of battle. An atrocity, on the other hand, would be a horrible crime committed in cold blood, and designed to make a political impact.
I have some experience with being blamed for the government's policies, having spent a year as a "baby-killer" in Viet Nam. Although I never killed any babies, or anyone else for that matter, I managed to get called that, and other endearments, by folks who'd never been outside the U.S., just because they didn't like Nixon's policy. I can tell you it's not pleasant.
So if you consider the administration's actions to be an atrocity, cuss them all you want. Don't forget the Congress, which approved them. But please quit denegrating our fighting men and women, who are doing a fine job under difficult circumstances.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME