Good morning America show-boated the Americans in Baghdad using themselves as human shields… You have got to give me a Break. They guy who was the “leader” really did have some good points, but the fact that he honestly thinks he is going to stop the war because of his shenanigans is pretty naïve. This guy fought in the first gulf war, and he still thinks it will work. I do not want to mention ‘hippie’ but that is the first thought that came to mind…
So what do the teeming millions think. Should these Americans (and Brits and Canadians) wake up and smell the coffee and get out of dodge, or do you think they will actually have any influence?
I haven’t read the cite you’ve given but i believe their objective is to stop the Americans bombing civilian targets and resources during a war, thus limiting civilian casualties not necessarily stop the war from happening
I think they will have some influence. They will help to promote anti-Americanism.
Note mogiaw’s comment: “I believe their objective is to stop the Americans bombing civilian targets and resources during a war, thus limiting civilian casualties not necessarily stop the war from happening.” So, the human shields promote the idea that America is planning to bomb civilians. In fact, America made efforts not to bomb civilian targets in the first Gulf War and in Afghanistan. OTOH Saddam has intentionally put military targets in civilian areas. In effect, he has used his entire civilian population as human shields. This is a war crime.
The publicity surrounding the “human shields” from the US, Canada, and Europe is helping to falsely portray the US as a potential war criminal. And, it helps to take the focus off Saddam’s actual war crimes.
I think the problem these people will face is that there’s very little chance that they will be allowed to chose where they station themselves as human shields. They will most likely be handed a list of places where they are “needed”, and it’s a good bet these places will not be hospitals and schools, but likely “baby milk factories”, wink, wink.
They are just plain stupid. The US does not target civilians. The US will not target civilians. Perhaps they should’ve stationed themselves in the WTT on Sept 10th 2001. I’m not implying a direct link between that tragedy and Iraq, just pointing out that these guys would better serve world peace if they directed their actions at those groups who DO target civilians.
If by acting as a “human shield” they attempt to defend a military installation or a surface-to-air missile site and in doing so put our troops in danger of attack… Fuck em, I care more about our soldiers than some moron hippy.
I rather hope they’ll see the plight of the Iraqi people, understand the inability of the people to protest against the mad dictator, realise they’ve made a mistake and … leave.
december:So, the human shields promote the idea that America is planning to bomb civilians. In fact, America made efforts not to bomb civilian targets in the first Gulf War and in Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, their efforts were sometimes unsuccessful, and US bombs did in fact take out many civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think you’re kidding yourself if you imagine that fears about potential American bombing of civilian targets are prompted more by stories about “human shields” than by the well-known fact that America has bombed civilian targets in the past.
Explain your logic, please? I think it may raise reactions like many here among americans, i.e. make them have less respect for antiwar protesters. I think in the middle east, it make help people realize that US public opinion is not monolithic-- that there are people here who don’t agree with the government. If they’d otherwise think we all want to kill all the Muslims, then that’s good.
That’s just your guilty conscience talking.
Well, that’s possible, and if he is as bad as US public opinion would have it, then that’s bad.
You make a good point here. It will however possibly confuse come muslims who really do believe everyone in the US hates them. Maybe with some luck some people will see that Americans at large do not support the war, but do support a regime change. However, I do believe once we start the war, cnn will air the names of the American Human Shields who were killed by a misplaced missile.
The footage that was shown on NBC this morning like CODA said shows quite a few Iraqis listening and supporting the people there demonstrating.
Interesting combination of shrewdness and jaw-dropping naviete.
My fave excerpt: "The shields stress that they came to protect civilians and not to support the Iraqi government, but the Iraqis inevitably blur such distinctions.
One American peace advocate recalled a typical march where the Westerners were chanting antiwar slogans and were suddenly joined by dozens of Iraqis hoisting pictures of Mr. Hussein. “It changed the spirit of the march,” said a recent college graduate who is one of the volunteers. “That wasn’t what we expected.”
I still like the comment made by this Iraqi engineer who works at an electrical power plant at Baghdad. When he found out some Americans were coming to be human shields at his power plant, he said, “They can stay if they want. As for me, when the bombs start dropping, I’m going home.”
Unless you count that Iraq has violated the terms of the cease fire agreement from the first war, which then means that we are no longer bound by our part of the agreement to end the assault. Or you may factor in that Hussein is in violation of all 18 odd U.N. resolutions calling for his disarmament. Or just possibly you might figure that we have a right to protect American civilians from a regime that is known to possess WMD and has allied himself with those that have already struck our country.
JH: *I’m sure that the primary targets for bombing are:
Students
Children
Old people*
I think you’re missing the whole point here. The human shields want to be posted at civilian sites because the mission of the human-shield presence is to try to protect civilians, remember? Whether the Iraqis will succeed in forcibly diverting them to military targets is a different issue: they are not there with the intention of trying to protect any but civilian sites.