You Subhuman Savages (Iraq Rant Ahead)

[gobear]

@tdn

Sheesh, it’s hard to know where to start.

For one thing you act like the US did some magnanimous favor for Iraq, and they’re just a bunch of ingrates. You seem to forget that for the most part, they never asked us for any favors. We simply assumed that they wanted good old-fashioned Yankee-style freedom. Maybe – just maybe – our help was unwelcome.

Of course, our help is unwelcome because we have royally screwed up a situation that was dangerous in the extreme to begin with. We had a window at the beginning whrn Iraq was glad to be free when we should have showered the country with largesse and let them choose their own leaders. Instead we have ruled the place like a conquered province–no wonder they hate us.

Perhaps an analogy will help. A thief is robbing you blind and beating you up daily. Understandably, this is a bad situation for you. You wish someone would come to your rescue. Suddenly, someone does. And it just so happens to be the far religious right. They are going to liberate you from not only that bully, but from that horribly oppressive homosexuality that has plagued you for so long. Your meek little voice tries to cry out “Thanks, but no thanks.” However, it is drowned out by the voices of your liberators shouting “Free gobear! Free him from his sexuality!”

And of course, anyone that speaks on your behalf is shouted down with “Why do you hate Jesus so much?”

So your liberators kill the thief, and drag you off to their church to cure your evil gay lifestyle. You struggle to get away from them as well, and cry “That’s not what I wanted.”

So – are you wrong? Those noble Christians have done you a huge favor, and look how ungrateful you are. In fact, they are so intent on saving you that they’re willing to kill you in the process. And they don’t see some noble individual fighting for his freedom – they just see some whiny fag who wouldn’t know a good thing when it bit him.

And of course it may dawn on you that they never really wanted to save you in the first place, they simply had an agenda and saw you as a useful tool for fulfilling it.

Does that analogy shed any light on things?

A. Don’t talk down to me.

B. You’ve got a far too simplistic analogy. The gay guy isn’t being changed, he’s being neglected. The Christians moved into his house, use his stuff, but they leave him hungry, without work and unable to redress his grievances. So he takes a gun and starts shooting.

C. Stop using my sexuality as a handle in every goddamn discussion. Yes, I’m gay. That has zero relevance to the discussion and I resent it being slapped in my face in every thread.

And Sailor** made some very good comments in his last post, so I retract my statements. sailor never has wished death on Americans, never expressed glee at American deaths and never applauded the deaths of Americans.

[tdn]

@gobear

A. Don’t talk down to me.

C. Stop using my sexuality as a handle in every goddamn discussion. Yes, I’m gay. That has zero relevance to the discussion and I resent it being slapped in my face in every thread.

I was neither talking down to you nor slapping you in the face. I was merely trying to put a spin on it that would show you a different perspective. I seemed to me like you having some trouble walking in someone else’s shoes, so I wanted to illustrate it from another viewpoint. However, I’ve offended you and I apologize. That was not my intent.

B. You’ve got a far too simplistic analogy. The gay guy isn’t being changed, he’s being neglected. The Christians moved into his house, use his stuff, but they leave him hungry, without work and unable to redress his grievances. So he takes a gun and starts shooting.

Not changed? I’d say trying to impose an alien system of government is trying to make a pretty big change. And the Christians are not just neglecting him and using his stuff, they are wrecking his house in violent ways and endangering his life, and expecting him to be grateful for the privelige. Quite frankly, I’d start shooting too.

[gobear]

@tdn

I was neither talking down to you nor slapping you in the face. I was merely trying to put a spin on it that would show you a different perspective. I seemed to me like you having some trouble walking in someone else’s shoes, so I wanted to illustrate it from another viewpoint. However, I’ve offended you and I apologize. That was not my intent.

I’m sorry for losing my temper, too. It’s not your fault–you couldn’t have known how much that annoys me.

Not changed? I’d say trying to impose an alien system of government is trying to make a pretty big change. And the Christians are not just neglecting him and using his stuff, they are wrecking his house in violent ways and endangering his life, and expecting him to be grateful for the privelige. Quite frankly, I’d start shooting too.

So would I. I do understand why the Iraqis are angry, but there’s a line between understanding and approving that seems to get crossed far too often. More to the point, I’m not the one who needs to learn that lesson. Tghere are others here who do no know or understand the the different Iraqi factionss have their own agendas that include far more than just getting the Americans out. If we left, things would get worse, not better.

[tdn]

@gobear

I’m sorry for losing my temper, too. It’s not your fault–you couldn’t have known how much that annoys me.

Don’t be – I knew full well that this bugged you, but for some reason I thought the way I presented it would be OK with you. Bad judgement on my part. Sorry.

So would I. I do understand why the Iraqis are angry, but there’s a line between understanding and approving that seems to get crossed far too often. More to the point, I’m not the one who needs to learn that lesson. Tghere are others here who do no know or understand the the different Iraqi factionss have their own agendas that include far more than just getting the Americans out. If we left, things would get worse, not better.

I think we’re not so far apart on opinion on this, and Sailor is pretty much there too. As to the kidnapping of the Japanese people, I’m sure that no one here condones that, and no one condones acts of terrorism. But things like that will happen anyway. We all understand that. It’s all part of the fun game we call war.

And point well taken about Iraqis with other agendas. No doubt there are some who would be the next evil dictator given half a chance. But sometimes it’s hard to tell them from the freedom fighters and poor farmers on the battlefield.

[RedFury]

Winning hearts and minds – if there are any left alive to win:

**Bremer announced the Falluja cease-fire after five days of street fighting. The director of the main hospital said 450 Iraqis had been killed and 1,000 wounded in the city this week.

Marines launched “Operation Iron Resolve” in Falluja after last week’s killing and mutilation of four U.S. security guards. The ferocity of the crackdown has angered Iraqi politicians working with Bremer’s administration.

“We are seeing the liquidation of a whole city,” Governing Council member Ghazi Ajil al-Yawar told Al Jazeera television, saying he might resign to protest the treatment of Falluja.

A Shi’ite in the 25-member Council, Abdul Karim al-Mohammadawi, has already suspended his membership.

**

Reuters

You know it’s simply murderous when members of America’s own puppet regime are resigning and/or threatening to resign.

Point being, this whole sordid mess has been partly justified – amongst the numerous other lies – to the unthinking American public (of which we have a few examples in this very thread) as some sort of undefined ‘retribution’ for the 9/11 attacks. And said retribution apparently continues unabated: kill four mercs (call them something else for the benefit of the pre-fooled) and 1500 Iraqis will be made to pay. That most of them are innocent, including any number of women and children, obviously does not enter into the equation.

And some of you still have the balls to question the motivation of the growing Iraqi resistance.

[The_Man_With_The_Golden_Gun]

Big text is something that needs to be seen more often, IMO

[Master_Wang-Ka]

Gee, I didn’t know Gobear was gay.

I have an extremely simplistic take on this whole situation: namely, that I can’t really blame you if you live in your country, and you want me to leave, and you take a shot at me by way of convincing me to skedaddle.

It’s THEIR country. Even more so, now that Saddam’s out of the picture.

True, our American boys went over there with the best of intentions, but it’s THEIR country, and THEY don’t want us there. Therefore, one should not be too wildly surprised if they get a little nutty about that particular topic.

On the other hand, taking prisoners for torture and murder is unacceptable, under any circumstances. Worse, it invites escalation of the situation. It makes it that much easier to view Iraqis in general as “barbarians, unworthy of civilized treatment” as opposed to “folks with a grievance which may well be legitimate.” War dehumanizes folks, and if this isn’t a peachy example, well, I don’t know what is.

Which brings us back to our Big Decision: either we leave, thus allowing the country to fall into bloody civil war, or we stay, and sacrifice yet more American lives for the sake of people who hate us.

Of course, there’s a third option. As I recall, Japan was ready to fight to the last infant to keep us from invading the mainland at the end of WWII. It would have been a horrible gory situation. Instead, they rolled over all meekly and let us walk on them for a few years, then copied all our best tricks and became a world power in and of themselves.

All it took was a couple nukes.

Of course, we had REASONS, then. Pearl Harbor. The Bataan Death March. The Rape of Nanking, and lots of other atrocities. There was a WAR on, dammit!

Y’know, none of these options looks at all appealing.

All hail Bush.

Wonder what options HE’LL take if we re-elect him?

[nameless]

If by “more” you mean “the exact polar opposite of more,” we are in total agreement.

[nameless]

@gobear

there’s a line between understanding and approving that seems to get crossed far too often

sailor, this is exactly the thing I was trying to get at. The line of which gobear speaks is a razor’s edge. I think he’s wrong when he says you take glee in the deaths of Americans, but to say you “side” with the Iraqi freedom fighters/terrorists/what have you–it implies a betrayal (when I read it, anyway). The connotation is there, even if that’s not what you meant.

The soldier who is in Iraq isn’t “wrong,” he’s following orders. Bush is wrong for sending him there to die for an unjust cause, and for that he deserves to be smacked soundly in the head, but to say you “side” with the Iraqi fighters… I dunno, it feels like you’re doing the Americans a disservice.

Granted, the Iraqis have every right to resist combatants. And though I understand why they would attack non-combatants, I do not sanction it. Most importantly, I am not implying that you like to see Americans wounded or killed. Maybe all I’m whining about is that your choice of phrase seems unfortunate to me and I am wasting valuable hamster power.

[sailor]

@nameless

sailor, The soldier who is in Iraq isn’t “wrong,” he’s following orders. Bush is wrong for sending him there to die for an unjust cause,

I have said the same thing many times. American soldiers dying are victims just as much as Iraqis are victims.

and for that he deserves to be smacked soundly in the head, but to say you “side” with the Iraqi fighters… I dunno, it feels like you’re doing the Americans a disservice.

I am not the president of the United States. He is the one doing the disservice.

Granted, the Iraqis have every right to resist combatants.

Agreed. And that includes combatant “contractors”.

And though I understand why they would attack non-combatants, I do not sanction it.

Neither do I but I go a step further and state that this was a foreseeable consequence of the invasion just like all the innocent dead killed by American forces. It is not an accident. The invasion could not be done without all this shit happening and he who ordered the invasion is responsible for the shit it created.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

[QUOTE=nameless Bush is wrong for sending him there to die for an unjust cause, and for that he deserves to be smacked soundly in the head, ([/QUOTE]

In my opinion the cause is just but futile, unappreciated and therefore wasteful of well meaning and generous coalition lives as well as innocent Iraqi lives.

[Sublight]

@TeaElle

19 year old japanese girl

Just for the sake of accuracy, the 19-year-old (18 according to some reports) is a boy. The woman being held hostage is 32.

@Olentzero

Am I mistaken, or did the Japanese constitution drawn up after their defeat in WWII expressly forbid Japan from sending troops abroad?

It does, and sending troops has provoked some major opposition here. Most of the left in Japan is opposed to sending troops, and the right is split between those opposed because they see it as Japan kowtowing to the Americans again, and those in favor because they see it as a step toward nudging Article 9 (no using troops for anything but defense) down the slippery slope and returning Japan its former military glory.

You may recall, though, back in GW v1.0, Japan sent funding and supplies, but no troops, in accordance with the rules set down in the Constitution, the creation of which was overseen by the American Occupation forces. For doing so, they were sharply criticized by many in America for not ‘supporting their allies’.

@gobear

We freed them from an evil regime, and now what you are seeing is not a proud, free people wanting to liberate themselves from a foreign oppressor, but groups of thugs wrestling for control of the country sand shooting at us because we are in the way. Do you believe that if the US skedaddled today that Iraq would be at peace?

Replace “freed them” with “set them loose” and I’ll agree with that first sentence. Saddam was a brutal, evil thug. But he was in power because he was more brutal and more evil than all the other thugs who also wanted to be in power, and still want to be in power now. I’m just not seeing a lot of evidence for the average Iraqi thinking “if Saddam is toppled, we can have a free, democratic Iraq” rather than “if Saddam is toppled, then maybe I can take over.”

As for your question, absolutely not. But do you believe conditions in Iraq would be significantly better or worse if the US skedaddled today? I honestly don’t know.

[duffer]

Oh, where to start.

First, sailor , I fundamentally disagree with your world-view, but my post was written in anger. Apologies.

I’m trying to be fast so I’ll just abstract some responses.

About the Japanese. They are still not allowed an armed force. The Japanese there are in a humanitarian capacity.

tdn , completly unfair analogy. You are equating a force invading to change religious views, not defeat tyranny. Nobody thinking clearly can think the US is there to convert anyone. Islam is a fine religion. It’s those that foment hatred based on it that are causing the trouble.

Some think we’re there for oil. Well, why not get the ole Iran/Iraq war resumed since the CIA can do that, right? Then Bush can fly in and tap BOTH countries’ oil reserves. (Hell I may be onto something here) *** duffer '04 ***

The main thing that gets me is how the Iraqi’s are lumped together. I live in the US and fully support the war. Many in the US don’t. See? There are differing thoughts in each country. The few militants in Iraq causing the current problems are dwarfed by those that want the schools, hospitals, electricity, gas, etc. They just don’t want to give up the power.

Those that want us there? They don’t have the firepower of those that want control.

Trust this, we do NOT want to be responsible for running Iraq. We have to regroup for Iran and Syria next.

[duffer]

@tdn

It ain’t rocket surgery!

BTW, request to use as sig.

[Olentzero]

@Sublight

[S]ending troops has provoked some major opposition here. Most of the left in Japan is opposed to sending troops, and the right is split between those opposed because they see it as Japan kowtowing to the Americans again, and those in favor because they see it as a step toward nudging Article 9 (no using troops for anything but defense) down the slippery slope and returning Japan its former military glory.

Arigato gozaimasu, Sublight. In response to duffer’s assertion, would you be able to shed some light on whether the Japanese troops in Iraq are armed or not?

You may recall, though, back in GW v1.0, Japan sent funding and supplies, but no troops, in accordance with the rules set down in the Constitution, the creation of which was overseen by the American Occupation forces. For doing so, they were sharply criticized by many in America for not ‘supporting their allies’.

Ah, the hijinks that arise from historical ignorance.

Saddam was a brutal, evil thug. But he was in power because he was more brutal and more evil than all the other thugs who also wanted to be in power, and still want to be in power now.

Saddam Hussein remained in power because the US helped engineer the coup that brought the Ba’ath Party into power in the first place, and then continued to support Saddam militarily and financially after he clawed his way to the top of the party ranks. (I presume we’ve all seen that video still of Rummy and Saddam shaking hands during the former’s visit to Baghdad in the mid-80s by now.) Whatever the personal objectives of the most prominent resistance leaders may be, the one thing I’m sure they have in common is the view that the US is just in there once again to build an Iraqi state in their own interests, and that they would much rather prefer the opportunity to have the country for themselves to rebuild.

I’m just not seeing a lot of evidence for the average Iraqi thinking “if Saddam is toppled, we can have a free, democratic Iraq” rather than “if Saddam is toppled, then maybe I can take over.”

Undoubtedly there are such folk in Iraq, just as there are in any country that’s shaken off the shackles of a dictatorship. Does it follow, therefore, that the entire country is populated by such megalomaniacs and they should not be allowed free rein in rebuilding their shattered nation? Absolutely not. I refer you to that poll I linked to earlier; while ~40% think a strong leader is necessary in the short term, that support shifts to out-and-out democracy when looking at the long term (5 years, more or less). If the strong man who comes out of this isn’t backed to the hilt by a larger imperialist power, there is less of a check on popular resistance which makes his removal from office a lot more likely in the event he gets too big for his britches.

As for your question, absolutely not. But do you believe conditions in Iraq would be significantly better or worse if the US skedaddled today? I honestly don’t know.

A significant minority of Iraqis think the US should have a role in the rebuilding of Iraq, but not a military one. Presumably they believe the US owes them a large amount of reparations - which I strongly agree with - and they would prefer financial and social aid over a military occupation. Troop withdrawal doesn’t mean complete abandonment.

[Sublight]

While the Japanese who have been kidnapped are unarmed members of a non-governmental humanitarian organization, the Japanese troops stationed in Samawah are armed (though also ostensibly there for humanitarian reasons), and are authorized to return fire if attacked.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3461643.stm
“Japan’s constitution prohibits the use of force in international disputes, but the Japanese Government argues the country is entitled to exercise self-defence and the troops will be able to return fire if they are attacked.”

[Sublight]

As for your other points, Olentzero, I was probably wallowing in cynical frustration when I characterized average Joe Iraqi as a wannbe warlord, as that’s probably not the case. But even if more than 80% want stability, the 10-20% determined to create chaos can do a very effective job of distrupting anything constructive. As bad as Hussein was, he maintained a kind of Pax Romana over all the other various factions of potential usurpers, and now that he’s gone I think a lot of them see this as their chance to make a grab. This could be a short-term thing that hopefully leads to real progress after a few years, or it could lead into another 20-year dictatorship. It might lead to another war with Iraq’s neighbors, continued chaos or possibly the rise of an extremist theocracy. What results will depend to a large extent on what moves the US, the UN and others make, and right now I can’t see what moves will create what result. What scares me is that I don’t think the people in charge can, either.

[Zoe]

Qadgop the Mercotan:
People talk about humanity like it’s always a good thing.

I am so often in agreement with you QTM, that I was surprised at your interpretation of what was being said.

My interpretation was just the opposite. I have interpreted Sailor, JayJay, calm kiwi, elfbabe and others to be saying that every culture and country has elements that are capable of such treachery.

Teaelle: Perhaps “subhuman” was not the best choice of words. But I’ll stick by savage and idiot. And selfish, brutal, tribal and feudal.

Yes. Those are good words to describe their behavior. But if you ever watch a documentary or film about U.S. military training camps, you will find that that is what our troops are trained to be also. Both sides believe that it is for a good cause. Which side you take most often seems to depend on circumstances of birth and training. I find that to be more than coincidental.

Supposedly we went to Iraq to remove Saddam, break Al Quida terrorist ties to Iraq, destroy the WMD, dismantle the Republican Guard and free the people of Iraq.

Saddam is out; there were no Al Quida terrorist ties before, but probably are now, we have found no WMD’s, the Republican Guard isn’t guarding anyone, the majority wants to impose a somewhat repressive Muslim government, civil war is a real possibility and about the only thing that is uniting two opposing factions is their dislike of America. We have killed thousands of innocent people and coalition men and women are also being slaughtered.

We have blood on our hands also.

[sailor]

Iraq Group Says Will Free Japanese Before Deadline

President Bush:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040410.html

Coalition forces are conducting a multi-city offensive. In Fallujah, Marines of Operation Vigilant Resolve are taking control of the city, block by block. Further south, troops of Operation Resolute Sword have taken the initiative from al-Sadr’s militia. Our coalition’s quick reaction forces are finding and engaging the enemy. Prisoners are being taken, and intelligence is being gathered. Our decisive actions will continue until these enemies of democracy are dealt with.

>> We have blood on our hands also

A lot of blood. Hundreds of Iraqis killed by American bombing in the last few days and Bush vows to continue.

[sailor]

I am outraged by the images of women and childre killed by the Americans. America should not be doing this. It is morally repulsive and I don’t care for any attempts to justify it.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001900798_insidefallujah11.html

FALLUJAH, Iraq — Wounded children lie in a makeshift hospital, bandaged and bloodied from fighting between U.S. forces and Sunni guerrillas that has raged through the town’s alleyways for days.

Hundreds of people have been killed in the fighting — no one can be sure of the number — and attempts at a cease-fire have so far failed to halt the bloodshed.

There were too many dead and wounded for hospital workers in the besieged town to deal with. Outside a hastily erected field hospital, television footage shows corpses lying in the street, wrapped in bloodstained white sheets. The dead include small children, women and old men, a newborn baby. Beside the corpses is a pile of body parts that no one has had time to deal with.

On radio, announcers accuse Americans of attacking helpless civilians, not even allowing them to move for treatment of their bullet wounds. In newspapers, the stories ask if the deaths of perhaps hundreds of innocent civilians is not a greater crime than the horrific deaths and mutilations of four Americans.

For the past week, those have been the images, sounds and words that Iraqis have been taking in as everything in Iraq has focused on Fallujah. In this one week, the medium-sized city in the Sunni Triangle has come to symbolize for Iraqis everything that is wrong with the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq.

Who are the savages in Iraq now?