Life just gets worse in Iraq - Page 29 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-02-2007, 10:13 AM   #421
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 08:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CTU2fan
Hmm, bet the 2 soldiers don't get an 8-page "RIP" thread in here...
Those 2 soldiers did not have the weight of all that loathing and hatred that Hussein did. It's precisely the cruelty that man inflicted which sets him apart from you and I, and the soldiers. For him, to us who wrote in that thread, death must be some kind of relief almost.

How in fucks name do you people not get this. Seriously. It's not rocket science.
__________________

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:43 AM   #422
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 08:29 AM
also side note - as sad as it is, those soldiers made a choice to go to IRaq to fight a war that a hell of a lot of people don't agree with. Im am deeply saddened for their families having to deal with their grief, but surely people who's loved ones are in the armed forces must be prepared for their loved one to possible die in some way.

On the other hand, Saddam was murdered under a stupid law, that shows no respect for human rights. Its a big difference.
__________________

__________________
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 01-02-2007, 10:48 AM   #423
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 05:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem


Those 2 soldiers did not have the weight of all that loathing and hatred that Hussein did. It's precisely the cruelty that man inflicted which sets him apart from you and I, and the soldiers. For him, to us who wrote in that thread, death must be some kind of relief almost.

How in fucks name do you people not get this. Seriously. It's not rocket science.
OK my comment was a bit snarky but please don't lump me in with the "you people". I know why 2 soldiers don't get the RIP thread, while Saddam does. I agree death probably is a relief to him in a way. But it's the wrong thread so I'll end the hijack...my bad.
__________________
CTU2fan is offline  
Old 01-02-2007, 03:21 PM   #424
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:29 PM
Just FYI ( ) we have had a memorial type thread for all dead soldiers (in the past when there was a war forum) that ended up closed because one or two people suggested (and in a rude manner, well at least one that I can recall was rude) that we didn't care about dead Iraqis because there was a thread like that. Such is the way in FYM sometimes..
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-02-2007, 04:08 PM   #425
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,472
Local Time: 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by dazzlingamy
On the other hand, Saddam was murdered under a stupid law, that shows no respect for human rights. Its a big difference.


i am against the death penalty in principle, even for someone as awful as Saddam (and i don't think it makes sense to make him a martyr, but that's another thread).

however, i don't really care that he's dead. fuck him. i'm against his execution, but not against a world without Saddam.

but i will say that while there is an element of "choice" in a soldier enlisting in the armed services, there's not much "choice" in being sent to Iraq, and we know that many, many servicemen are deeply against the Iraq war. after all, who wants to die so that a president may save face?

i just think that making comparisons between Saddam and ordinary soldiers is going to rub people the wrong way.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 01-02-2007, 06:10 PM   #426
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 08:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by CTU2fan


OK my comment was a bit snarky but please don't lump me in with the "you people". I know why 2 soldiers don't get the RIP thread, while Saddam does. I agree death probably is a relief to him in a way. But it's the wrong thread so I'll end the hijack...my bad.
No worries. I shouldn't have jumped on the cranky wagon, either, lol.

sorry about the "you people" bit!
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-02-2007, 06:23 PM   #427
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,472
Local Time: 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
sorry about the "you people" bit!


some of my best friends are you people.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 01-02-2007, 06:41 PM   #428
New Yorker
 
*Ally*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,714
Local Time: 05:29 PM
Iraq: 12,000 civilians killed in '06

By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer
51 minutes ago

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq reported Tuesday that about 12,000 civilians were killed last year — the third full year since the U.S.-led invasion — with a dramatic rise in the last three months, when 5,000 died. Only about half as many Iraqi soldiers died in 2006 as American troops.

ADVERTISEMENT

But the number of Iraqi security forces killed jumps to 1,543, nearly double the American death count of 823 for the year, when the deaths of police, who conduct paramilitary operations, are added to the number of slain Iraqi soldiers.

In all, the Iraqi ministries of Health, Defense and Interior reported a total of 13,896 Iraqi civilians, police and soldiers died last year, 162 more than the tally kept by The Associated Press.

The AP count, assembled from its daily news reports, was always believed to be substantially lower than the actual number of deaths because the news cooperative does not have daily access to official accounting by the Iraqi ministries. Many deaths were thought to have gone unreported by AP.

Counts kept by other groups, including the United Nations, list far higher death tolls, which are disputed by the Iraqi government.

While the U.S. government and military provide no death totals for Iraqis, the U.N. Assistance Ministry for Iraq, UNAMI, does keep a count based on reports it gathers from the Baghdad morgue, Ministry of Health, and Medico-Legal Institute.

The figures for November and December are not yet available from the U.N., but as of the end of October the organization had reported 26,782 deaths in the first 10 months of 2006, nearly double what the Iraqi government and the AP reported for the entire year.

In its last report, the U.N. said 3,709 Iraqi civilians were killed in October alone and that citizens were fleeing the country at a pace of 100,000 each month. The organization estimates at least 1.6 million Iraqis had left since the war began in March 2003.

Life for Iraqis, especially in Baghdad and cities and towns in the center of the country, has become increasingly untenable. Many schools failed to open in September, and professionals — especially professors, physicians, politicians and journalists — are falling to sectarian killers at a stunning pace.

At the time of the last U.N. report, Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh called it "inaccurate and exaggerated" because it was not based on official government reports.

The U.N. report said Iraq's heavily armed Shiite militias were gaining strength and influence and that torture was rampant, despite the Iraqi government's vow to reduce human rights abuses.

"Hundreds of bodies continued to appear in different areas of Baghdad — handcuffed, blindfolded and bearing signs of torture and execution-style killing," the last UNAMI report said. "Many witnesses reported that perpetrators wear militia attire and even police or army uniforms."

The two primary militias in Iraq are the military wings of the country's strongest Shiite political groups, on which Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is heavily dependent. Al-Maliki has repeatedly rejected U.S. demands that he disband the heavily armed groups, especially the Mahdi Army of radical anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

"I think the type of violence is different in the past few months," Gianni Magazzeni, the UNAMI chief in Baghdad, said when the last report was issued in late November. "There was a great increase in sectarian violence in activities by terrorists and insurgents, but also by militias and criminal gangs."

He noted that religious clashes have been common since Sunni Arab insurgents bombed a major Shiite shrine on Feb. 22 in Samarra, north of Baghdad.

UNAMI's Human Rights Office continued to receive reports that Iraqi police and security forces have either been infiltrated by or act in collusion with militias, the report said.

It said that while sectarian violence is the main cause of the civilian killings, Iraqis also continue to be the victims of terrorist acts, roadside bombs and drive-by shootings. Others have been caught in the crossfire between rival gangs.

In its September 2006 issue, The Lancet, an independent and authoritative journal, published a study on mortality rates in Iraq.

The study estimated that 654,965 excess Iraqi deaths, including 601,027 from violence, had occurred in Iraq since the invasion of the country in March 2003.

The "confidence range" for the number of excess Iraqi deaths because of violence has been estimated at between 426,369 and 793,663, with 601,027 as the median number.

The U.S. government and Iraq as well as others, including the Iraq Body Count, an organization which has conducted other types of surveys, denied the validity of the study's findings.

The Iraqi Minister of Health, in a statement made in Vienna in early November, indicated that as many as 150,000 Iraqi civilians might have been violently killed since 2003. But there are no known statistics for the early months of the U.S.-led invasion.

After an extraordinary violence-free start to 2007, Iraqi authorities reported on Tuesday that at least 57 Iraqis were killed in sectarian bloodshed, including 45 tortured bodies found dumped in Baghdad and five in Kut to the south.

Three Iraqi civilians were killed in a roadside bombing Tuesday in eastern Baghdad, police reported. In Baqouba, gunmen killed Diyala provincial council member Ali Majeed and three members of his family. The four were gunned down while driving near the town of al-Wajihiya, Diyala provincial police said.

The military announced the death of a U.S. soldier by a roadside bomb southwest of Baghdad. The blast Monday wounded three others, including an interpreter, as they talked with residents about sectarian violence, the military said.

U.S. troops killed a suspected al-Qaida weapons dealer and two other people in Baghdad raids Tuesday.

In Fallujah, a U.S. Marine fatally wounded an Iraqi soldier in an altercation at the guard post they shared, the U.S. military said.

The confrontation took place Saturday between members of U.S. and Iraqi units assigned to combined security posts at the Fallujah Government Center. The Marine — assigned to the 1st Battalion, 24th Marine Regiment, Regimental Combat Team 5 — has been assigned to administrative duties while the military investigates.
__________________
*Ally* is offline  
Old 01-03-2007, 08:30 AM   #429
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 08:29 AM
oh how i want to say something but won't

poor iraqis
__________________
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 01-03-2007, 12:43 PM   #430
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 05:29 PM
Ya we're doing a helluva a job over there...somebody tell me how these guys are better than Saddam Hussein, because I'm damned if I can see a difference/improvement. Saddam may have been a tyrant, but his replacements are apparently religious zealots as well...
__________________
CTU2fan is offline  
Old 01-03-2007, 01:15 PM   #431
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:29 AM
Saddams regime averaged some 20,000 deaths a year with the additional bodycount of the manipulated sanctions which pushed some half a million through the 1990's; but the grim machinery of death was out of the way and as some say was only used on people (or families) who opposed Saddam (as if that makes it alright - or in some way morally better than the random carnage of the suicide bomber).
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 01-03-2007, 03:28 PM   #432
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Saddams regime averaged some 20,000 deaths a year
did you get this number from the same people that said

"He has WMDs, it is a slam dunk case"

"Saddam and 911 are connected."

"Saddam is trying to import "yellow cake" from Niger"?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 01-03-2007, 07:21 PM   #433
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 08:29 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




some of my best friends are you people.
I'm sure some of mine are, too. It's so easy to hate someone who repulses us to the core. However, it's never really been about Hussein himself, as you know.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-05-2007, 08:38 AM   #434
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:29 PM
Oh she is so correct about that resistance to admitting mistakes in the American male...

So is it a male thing, strictly a Bush thing, or a combination of both?

Quindlen: Contrition as Leadership


By Anna Quindlen
Newsweek

Jan. 8, 2007 issue - When word circulated that the president would make a speech to the nation on Iraq in the new year, there was speculation about what he would say. Some suspected he would just repeat boilerplate sentiments about bringing freedom to Iraqis and making America safe from terrorism. Others thought that his remarks would address a new direction, perhaps a significant increase in the number of troops.

But no one suggested that George W. Bush would utter the words polls indicate so many Americans believe he should: "I made a mistake. I'm sorry."

It's tempting to think that the utter laughability of that notion reflects the personality of a chief executive known more for digging in his heels than holding out his hand. But it may say as much about power, the presidency and even masculinity, American style.

Historians come up pretty empty when asked to recall public admissions of error from the Oval Office. Richard Pious, the Barnard professor who wrote "The American Presidency," cites John F. Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs as the "rare example of a president who took full responsibility." Doris Kearns Goodwin, whose book on Lincoln, "Team of Rivals," was the one President Bush chose as his favorite this year, says that in a letter to Ulysses S. Grant after the fall of Vicksburg, Lincoln admitted that he'd doubted his general's strategy. "I now wish to make the personal acknowledgment," he wrote, "that you were right and I was wrong."

It's difficult to imagine any modern American president expressing error in such an overt fashion, perhaps because instead of a personal communication his admission would become the stuff of pundit second-guessing. And today the apology has also been devalued by a flood of cheap contrition from actors, comedians, athletes and rock stars for everything from drunken driving to bigoted outbursts. Those exercises have more to do with rehabilitation than regret, and it shows. "I'm sorry I offended other people" winds up putting the burden on the distressed rather than the distressor. The classic "mistakes were made" suggests that error is a naturally occurring event, like a sleet storm, rather than a matter of personal failing.

But in terms of presidential admissions, Deborah Tannen, the Georgetown professor who has written a raft of popular books on what we say and why, says it would be a mistake to overlook how deeply ingrained resistance to admitting mistakes is in the American male. "The public persona of authority is hypermasculine," Tannen says. "The masculine approach in our culture is never to apologize because it indicates weakness."

The sociolinguist says a true apology has four parts: admitting fault, showing remorse, acknowledging damage and indicating how it will be repaired. That scenario is perfect for confronting the debacle of Iraq—for either side. Those who believe the war was wrong would love to hear the president admit that it was based on faulty intelligence, that he regrets the invasion, that he recognizes that thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died as a result, and that he intends to cease combat operations as soon as possible. And those who think the war was merely prosecuted incorrectly would like a statement that the threat from the insurgency was underestimated, that the president regrets that he didn't listen to those who said so from the beginning, that the conflict has been prolonged because of that, and that he will now send more troops as a response.

In their informative primer on the war, "Out of Iraq," George McGovern and William Polk begin with this stark sentence: "Events have proven that the U.S. government's decision to invade and occupy Iraq in 2003 was a calamitous mistake." Poll figures show that the majority of Americans agree. But the coauthors note, "Alien to Americans is the idea of making amends for our actions; we do not like ever to admit that we have been wrong."

But at times of schism, presidents should mirror our best impulses, not our commonplace ones. And if power means never having to say you're sorry, then the powerful miss the opportunity to truly lead. As Goodwin notes, "They fear it suggests weakness to acknowledge error when in fact it suggests strength, self-confidence and the ability to learn and grow." In Tannen's terms, language offers two paths, dominance and connection. "When you say you made a mistake, you are creating a connection," she notes.

In this case, you would also be stating the obvious. Over the nearly four years of the conflict in Iraq, more and more Americans have come to realize that significant errors were at the root of the entire enterprise. The man who must take responsibility for those errors ought to acknowledge them rather than fall back on talking points that are as tinny as an empty can. Of changing his mind, Lincoln once said something along the lines of hoping he was smarter today than he was yesterday. That's certainly true of the American people on Iraq. It would be good to learn that it's true of their leader as well.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-05-2007, 09:59 AM   #435
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 10:29 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
And today the apology has also been devalued by a flood of cheap contrition from actors, comedians, athletes and rock stars for everything from drunken driving to bigoted outbursts. Those exercises have more to do with rehabilitation than regret, and it shows. "I'm sorry I offended other people" winds up putting the burden on the distressed rather than the distressor. The classic "mistakes were made" suggests that error is a naturally occurring event, like a sleet storm, rather than a matter of personal failing.
Those are some interesting points. You really do need both the regret and the willingness to take responsibility in order for it to be a true apology.

As far as the specifically political implications though, I don't know--I do tend to think that there's such a thing as mistakes (and/or failures to do the right thing) whose consequences are of such awful magnitude as to make a literal "I'm sorry..." (as distinct from doing what you can to rectify things) seem almost obscene, at least at the time--any apology by nature underscores the vulnerability of the wronged party, pressures them to maintain faith in the person offering the apology, and that can make for a very fraught dynamic sometimes. I wouldn't want to try to quantify that but I do think it can happen. If we do wind up withdrawing altogether from Iraq in the near future, I don't envy whoever gets to make the bowing out speech.

I don't myself find women to be particularly better than men at owning up to their wrongs--less likely to be cocky maybe, a little more self-deprecating, but that's not the same thing as actually having a clear-headed view of what you've done to harm people and openly acknowledging and taking responsibility for it. Maybe it's just the people I know though, everyone's perceptions are on these sorts of things are different.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com