First off I have to say that with war looming in Iraq that I fully understand and appreciate those who oppose the coming conflict and those who have strong doubts about if force is the best solution for the situation. I find myself deeply conflicted on the issue and those of you from all viewpoints who are strongly voicing your opinions are of great value to me.
Sometimes when confronted with pure raw stupidity it takes a moment for anyone capable of rational thought a moment to put that capability to use. Let’s start with a brief summary. These folks are volunatrily going to Iraq and plan to stand around potential targets that the US might blow the holy bejeezus out of in the hope that their presence there might stop the war altogether.
There is a line between passionate opposition to something and outright treason and these folks are talking a running jump over it. On the bright side, they are probably going to die and thus raise the average intelligence of all life on the planet.
These folks aren’t simply opposing the war, they are offering to help protect assets under the control of Saddam Hussein, whom I do believe most everyone agrees is not a very nice person. The possibility that these volunteers might end up use their morally pure flesh protecting chemical warheads apparently hasn’t crossed their dimutive minds. If they find themselves guarding an anti-aircraft gun site will they help load? Perhaps take a few nice Jane Fonda glossy photos? At the very least they should take into consideration that they are helping to defend a tyrant who tortures and kills people. It’s one thing not to want to bring war to the Iraqi people, another to lend a hand to their oppresive leader.
Let’s briefly discuss the hesitation this brillant plan might cause George Bush.
None at all.
Now let’s briefly discuss the amount of protection human flesh provides to any object being targeted by a 2000lb Smart bomb.
On second thought, let’s not. It’s a fairly gross mental picture. Suffice to say a stupid shield is no match for a smart bomb.
If we go to war with Iraq, I will feel great regret at the loss of every innocent Iraqi life. I will sorry for all the soldiers that lose their lives fighting in good faith for their country. I won’t waste a moment of my time thinking about the fleshy goo that placed themselves at the disposal of Saddam Hussein.
I adire their courage more than I can say. They know they are taking a tremendous risk with their lives. But if the American and British military destroy these human beings, the outcry against the war will be even greater. It reminds me of the monks who set themselves on fire during the war in Vietnam.
Of course there are no guarantees about the outcome. That makes their sacrifices even greater.
Certainly not all of them could be considered traitors. They come from many countries and, as it stands now, only two countries will be at war with Iraq.
Oh, I guess he’s even “more” of an “amoral scumbag” than you thought because he won’t allow a mere handful of people armed only with passports, not even from the U.S., to affect a major U.S. policy decision? You actually think that it would be more “moral” for him to allow a couple dozen people to hold U.S. policy in check? If this tactic were actually effective, we might as well abandon our sovereignty over to whatever group of kooks walks by, or even Frenchmen.
Jeez, people thought I was an appeaser suggesting we should adopt policies designed to “stop pissing off the terrorists”, but this goes too far even for me.
If they really do end up being allowed to hang out in the homes of Iraqi civilians and hospitals then odds are pretty good they’ll be just fine since the US doesn’t intentionally target such things anyway. Follow that thought for a moment… they will be detering attacks from places that the US won’t be targeting anyway. Why yes, at best it’s a big waste of time! Although I’m sure when they get back they’ll subject us to the torture of their book deals.
Of course there’s the “at worst” possibility and these nimrods think that that would be being hit by an errant US strike. Oh, no dear peons. The worst scenario involves Saddam rounding them up as free hostages. Perhaps he’ll toss a few into an acid bath and send the film footage to CNN. He’ll demand an end to hostalities or the rest get dunked too. Saddam when cornered is going to get very desperate.
These folks are small minded potential little tools.
It is unfortunate that we’re losing a perfectly good word. While amoral does still primarily mean morally neutral, it is fast encroaching on meaning immoral. The Amorality Preservation Society thanks you for your future diligence.
I just saw this guy being interviewed on FOX and Friends, is it true what he said? That we the US supplied all those chemicals and warfare ammunition to IRAQ, when they were at war with IRAN?
Someone please confirm, because this is the first I’ve heard of it…I hope its not true.
Small minded? How so?
You may think their tactics are ill-conceived, but surely their ultimate goal is admirable (the prevention of war and/or civilian casualties)?
Other than their own, whose lives are they risking?
What’s your problem with these people?
If all you’re worried about is their stupidity, you’ll worry yourself to death on this planet!
Is your real concern that maybe their death or presence would make a big difference in the propaganda war?
Many chemicals have dual use capabilites. During the 1980’s US companies were not restricted in selling such chemicals to Iraq. And yes, even after we should have known better. US companies never supplied a big vat of mustard gas, but US and European chemical companies did sell to Iraq the necessary precursor chemicals so they could mix it themselves.
Their tactics are futile and insulting. They are implying that while the US wouldn’t hesitate to bomb some poor Iraqi’s house, it won’t do it if some Westerner flesh is there. This is simply not true. The US military will try to avoid civilian casualties whether or not these human shields are present. If a bomb goes astray, their presence won’t change the horrific results. Their actions go too far in aiding Saddam. At best they provide propaganda for him, at worst they’ll become bargaining chips. I also suspect that some of these people might be surprised at the reception that some Iraqis will give them. There are Iraqis who would welcome Saddam’s demise even at the terrible cost of war. I doubt very much that some Iraqis will understand these peace loving folks coming in and trying to prevent the overthrow of a man who probably killed or tortured a relative of theirs.
That guy they just interviewed on Fox and friends was freakish looking. Facial piercings? Ya, he’ll get into Iraq…
Since Saddam has shown in the last round of games that he has no problem with hiding military targets under civilian facilities, I suspect that we will soon have little bits of human shields all over Iraq, just adding to the workload of those who are going to have to clean up.
Insulting to whom? If they’re futile, why do you care?
So you’re saying that the US will try to equally avoid loss of life among westerners and Iraqis. Good.
So given that their lives are no more or less valuable than millions of Iraqi lives (many bargaining chips there!), why might they become bargaining chips themselves?
Yeah, OK, hands up all Iraqis who are prepared to die in bombings in order to get Saddam out. C’mon, we need more of you than that!!!
To me this is legitimate (albeit exceptionally risky!) protest.
OK, I know this isn’t GD so I’ll shut up.
Insulting to the US military for implying that they will only try to avoid hitting civilian targets if Westerners are present.
Why do I care? Um… well my own life sucks right now so I’m just redirecting it. A classic case really…
Because Saddam thinks they have a higher value to us.
You’d be surprised. I heard an NPR report where a reporter commented on several Iraqis that snuck over to him, away from the ever present Iraqi handlers, and whisper just such support for US action. They risked their lives just to do that.
I’m not under some grand illusion that all Iraqis will welcome US military action, especially if things go bad and house to house fighting erupts with heavy civilian casualties. But I also believe that the average Iraqi very much would like to see Saddam dead.
To me it crosses the line. I can see the anti-war protestors in Washington as patriotic, but these folks are rushing off to give support to Saddam, even if that isn’t their true intention.
No need to shut up, you are doing fine. I put this in the BBQ pit because I thought it would degenrate quickly. I could cuss more I suppose. But note that I didn’t cite my NPR reference. So Ha!