"peace" at what cost? collateral damages in the hunt for Saddam

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

sulawesigirl4

Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Joined
Jul 25, 2000
Messages
7,415
Location
Virginia
This is just one report of many that I have been seeing and it disturbs me. I understand the pressing desire of the US to find Saddam and capture him (although I imagine that when he's found he will be killed so as to save everyone the "trouble" of a trial...this is just my cynical opinion). But going about this search and destroy mission in such a way that innocent civilians keep getting caught in the crossfire seems to me to be a very bad way to conduct the "hearts and minds" campaign.

This report is from Robert Fisk of the Independent. I'm sure his reputation as a liberal will make some tune him out automatically, but the man has a very extensive background in journalism and the Middle East.

28 July 2003: (The Independent) Obsessed with capturing Saddam Hussein, American soldiers turned a botched raid on a house in the Mansur district of Baghdad yesterday into a bloodbath, opening fire on scores of Iraqi civilians in a crowded street and killing up to 11, including two children, their mother and crippled father. At least one civilian car caught fire, cremating its occupants.

The vehicle carrying the two children and their mother and father was riddled by bullets as it approached a razor-wired checkpoint outside the house.

rest of report here

I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that if US troops are trained for military operations and not peacekeeping operations, it might be wise for all involved to get the UN involved as soon as possible. I guess that's not going to happen, but I certainly wish it would. :|
 
found it!

iraq body count

low/high estimates place the casualty level of iraqi citizens to be between 6085 and 7796.

incident by incident report
-just about each incident has 2 or more sources collaborating though links are not provided. these sources are often AP, reuters, NYT, CNN, etc...

of course, numbers such as these are classically under reported.
 
Last edited:
sulawesigirl4 said:
although I imagine that when he's found he will be killed so as to save everyone the "trouble" of a trial...this is just my cynical opinion

Oh, he'll be killed alright. But he has already made up his mind that he'll be killed. He will never surrender. He will have to be killed.
 
I guess some lives are cheaper than others. Or does the end justify the means here? I say no, but others will surely disagree with me.
 
80sU2isBest said:
Oh, he'll be killed alright. But he has already made up his mind that he'll be killed. He will never surrender. He will have to be killed.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. What you're suggesting is that if someone is prepared to take their own life, then they should be pre-emptively killed? For what reason? For revenge? For blood? For "justice"? If he was cornered and ready to pull the trigger on himself, why would it be necessary for our forces to beat him to it?
 
sulawesigirl4 said:
Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. What you're suggesting is that if someone is prepared to take their own life, then they should be pre-emptively killed? For what reason? For revenge? For blood? For "justice"? If he was cornered and ready to pull the trigger on himself, why would it be necessary for our forces to beat him to it?

I think '80s meant that Saddam will try to twist the situation in such a way that, when almost captured, US forces have to kill him. Should he be cornered he would not be ready to pull the trigger on himself, but instead would aim at those cornering him. This would create a situation in which it is almost impossible to get Saddam while not get killed yourself. Hence, you have to kill Saddam to get out of the situation (or let him leave which they certainly won't allow).
That way he can be presented as a martyr killed by the enemy (most likely the USA) instead of a ruthless dictator captured by the allies (still most likely the USA).

Saddam is prepared to take his own life by threatening to kill others.

Hope this clarifies the sick mind of Saddam.

C ya!

Marty
 
Alright, I see your point, although I disagree that it would be necessary. A bullet in the leg or a horse tranquilizer seem to be just as condusive to the end result, imo. But regardless, I don't want the thread to be derailed. Can we return to the original topic? What are the ramifications of all of these raids and shootouts that are costing innocent civilians their lives?
 
saddam has no legs. he is just a head. floating. an evil floating head.

sulawesigirl4 said:
What are the ramifications of all of these raids and shootouts that are costing innocent civilians their lives?

well you would think the ramifications will be a deficit of trust, respect, accountability and civility between iraqi civilians and american figures of authority.
 
btw, on the previous discussion regarding taking Saddam alive, there's an interesting article in the Boston Globe which discusses the reasons the US has in making sure he doesn't actually stand trial. link here
 
Back
Top Bottom