The Asylum Private Messages Options Search Blogs Images Chat Cam Portals Calendar FAQ's Join  
Asylum Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.8 Asylum Forums > Políticás der Monde > The experience of a volunteer American "human shield" in Iraq
Pages (2): [1] 2 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread [new thread]    [post reply]
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

The experience of a volunteer American "human shield" in Iraq

I was a naive fool to be a human shield for Saddam
By Daniel Pepper
(Filed: 23/03/2003)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;$sessionid$TNEYVFJNKXUL5QFIQMGSFFOwAVCBQWIV0?xml=/opinion/2003/03/23/do2305.xml


I wanted to join the human shields in Baghdad because it was direct action which had a chance of bringing the anti-war movement to the forefront of world attention. It was inspiring: the human shield volunteers were making a sacrifice for their political views - much more of a personal investment than going to a demonstration in Washington or London. It was simple - you get on the bus and you represent yourself.

So that is exactly what I did on the morning of Saturday, January 25. I am a 23-year-old Jewish-American photographer living in Islington, north London. I had travelled in the Middle East before: as a student, I went to the Palestinian West Bank during the intifada. I also went to Afghanistan as a photographer for Newsweek.

The human shields appealed to my anti-war stance, but by the time I had left Baghdad five weeks later my views had changed drastically. I wouldn't say that I was exactly pro-war - no, I am ambivalent - but I have a strong desire to see Saddam removed.

We on the bus felt that we were sympathetic to the views of the Iraqi civilians, even though we didn't actually know any. The group was less interested in standing up for their rights than protesting against the US and UK governments.

I was shocked when I first met a pro-war Iraqi in Baghdad - a taxi driver taking me back to my hotel late at night. I explained that I was American and said, as we shields always did, "Bush bad, war bad, Iraq good". He looked at me with an expression of incredulity.

As he realised I was serious, he slowed down and started to speak in broken English about the evils of Saddam's regime. Until then I had only heard the President spoken of with respect, but now this guy was telling me how all of Iraq's oil money went into Saddam's pocket and that if you opposed him politically he would kill your whole family.

It scared the hell out of me. First I was thinking that maybe it was the secret police trying to trick me but later I got the impression that he wanted me to help him escape. I felt so bad. I told him: "Listen, I am just a schmuck from the United States, I am not with the UN, I'm not with the CIA - I just can't help you."

Of course I had read reports that Iraqis hated Saddam Hussein, but this was the real thing. Someone had explained it to me face to face. I told a few journalists who I knew. They said that this sort of thing often happened - spontaneous, emotional, and secretive outbursts imploring visitors to free them from Saddam's tyrannical Iraq.

I became increasingly concerned about the way the Iraqi regime was restricting the movement of the shields, so a few days later I left Baghdad for Jordan by taxi with five others. Once over the border we felt comfortable enough to ask our driver what he felt about the regime and the threat of an aerial bombardment.

"Don't you listen to Powell on Voice of America radio?" he said. "Of course the Americans don't want to bomb civilians. They want to bomb government and Saddam's palaces. We want America to bomb Saddam."

We just sat, listening, our mouths open wide. Jake, one of the others, just kept saying, "Oh my God" as the driver described the horrors of the regime. Jake was so shocked at how naive he had been. We all were. It hadn't occurred to anyone that the Iraqis might actually be pro-war.

The driver's most emphatic statement was: "All Iraqi people want this war." He seemed convinced that civilian casualties would be small; he had such enormous faith in the American war machine to follow through on its promises. Certainly more faith than any of us had.

Perhaps the most crushing thing we learned was that most ordinary Iraqis thought Saddam Hussein had paid us to come to protest in Iraq. Although we explained that this was categorically not the case, I don't think he believed us. Later he asked me: "Really, how much did Saddam pay you to come?"

It hit me on visceral and emotional levels: this was a real portrayal of Iraq life. After the first conversation, I completely rethought my view of the Iraqi situation. My understanding changed on intellectual, emotional, psychological levels. I remembered the experience of seeing Saddam's egomaniacal portraits everywhere for the past two weeks and tried to place myself in the shoes of someone who had been subjected to seeing them every day for the last 20 or so years.

Last Thursday night I went to photograph the anti-war rally in Parliament Square. Thousands of people were shouting "No war" but without thinking about the implications for Iraqis. Some of them were drinking, dancing to Samba music and sparring with the police. It was as if the protesters were talking about a different country where the ruling government is perfectly acceptable. It really upset me.

Anyone with half a brain must see that Saddam has to be taken out. It is extraordinarily ironic that the anti-war protesters are marching to defend a government which stops its people exercising that freedom.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 08:27 AM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35658

I am interested in this whole 'human shileds' business, which appears to have powerfully affected a lot of people in the West (who mostly seem outraged that they went). Of the 200 who went in originally, I read that 120 remained, and that 30 more turned up from South Africa. Given that it is a pretty dangerous thing to do, and given that Saddam is an utter shit, I am more surprised by how many have stayed rather than by how many have come home (some weren't going to stay there all the way through anyhow, given that they have jobs that they have to return to).

The whole 'human shields' thing is a sideshow, anyway, surely.

__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 09:21 AM
Smug Git is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Smug Git Click here to Send Smug Git a Private Message Find more posts by Smug Git Add Smug Git to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
skalie
the honourable

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15003

"I was shocked when I first met a pro-war Iraqi in Baghdad"

Heh, it's true that a proportion of the anti-war lot might not be the sharpest tools in the shed, but some of these human shield types seem to be niave to the extreme.

Did it really take a conversation with a Baghdad taxi driver to realise that Hussein is a rotter of the highest order? Was he one of those human shields that bailed it out because it started getting dangerous, I wonder?

What is more critical at this stage of the game is that a lot of Iraqi's want to see the coalition piss off out of their country, even if it means keeping Saddam in power for the meantime, it appears.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 09:26 AM
skalie is offline Click Here to See the Profile for skalie Click here to Send skalie a Private Message Find more posts by skalie Add skalie to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

I am curious about sources stating that the average (alot of) Iraqi wants coalition forces out.

I am also suprised at how many "human shields" have actually stayed. As the taxi driver alluded- and he may have inside info just from living there- some of these may actually be paid and living in a plush hotel somewhere about now. Surely if coalition missiles had wiped any of them out it would be all over Al-Jezeera and Iraqi tv and likely headline news in the west as well.

Normaly with fringe fanatic groups/actions there are a few ringleaders with an agenda thats a little different than the vast majority of their ignorant/blind/nieve followers are motivated by.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 06:17 PM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Goatboy
the anticlimax

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: A New England
Posts: 9187

He seemed convinced that civilian casualties would be small; he had such enormous faith in the American war machine to follow through on its promises

So this is what ashes taste like?

__________________
Arbeit Macht Frei

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 06:29 PM
Goatboy is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Goatboy Click here to Send Goatboy a Private Message Find more posts by Goatboy Add Goatboy to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

quote:
Originally posted by Goatboy
He seemed convinced that civilian casualties would be small; he had such enormous faith in the American war machine to follow through on its promises

So this is what ashes taste like?



I don't get it. For any force in history to make such progress in such short time, civilian casualties would have been enourmous. In fact, we could have already easily won the war by now if we were not making such strenuous and deliberate attempts to minimize civilian casualties. You don't agree?

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 09:42 PM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
skalie
the honourable

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15003

quote:
Originally posted by Itch
I don't get it. For any force in history to make such progress in such short time, civilian casualties would have been enourmous. In fact, we could have already easily won the war by now if we were not making such strenuous and deliberate attempts to minimize civilian casualties. You don't agree?


Quite

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 10:04 PM
skalie is offline Click Here to See the Profile for skalie Click here to Send skalie a Private Message Find more posts by skalie Add skalie to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

So I should assume that you disagree with the statements made in my last post? You beleive that the coalition is NOT minimizing civilian casaulties while engaging in war, that other forces in history have or even could make such dramatic military progress with the same low number of civilian casualties, and that if we didn't care about the civilians we could not have already leveled every city in Iraq and stand victorious?

I would like to see the logic behind your beleif then. Certainly Iraqi civilians are dying as a result of coalition action, but each such death is counted as a "mistake". The Hussein regime has killed 5000 Iraqi civilians every month at least since 1992. Thats 600,000 over a period of ten years. And that is an extremely conservative estimate. Higher estimates put the figure at a little over 2 million. But to give you the benefit of the doubt, we will say 600,000.

Odds are the same regime will last another 10 years unless WE take it out. Thats another 600,000. Total civlian casualties if we do not force Hussein out will be (at the lowest) 1,200,000.

I will be shocked if civilian casualties in this conflict reach even 10,000. Iraqi officials report over 350 cilvian dead so far. Lets say the IRAQI regime information is correct and that they are not exagerating (ahem), and lets say that due to urban fighting to take Baghdad, we inflict even 100 times more civilan casualties than have already been inflicted. Now we have 35000 civilian dead. A tragedy to be sure, but a far better than the 1,200,000 civilian dead that we KNOW will die if we do not take the regime out now. Even giving Iraqs own civilian dead reports, and even using the most conservative estimates of how many people the regime will/has killed, the number dead by accident, by coalition mistakes is THIRTY FIVE times less than those killed/to be killed by Hussein.

But then again, regardless of any outcome in objective reality, the war is really about making the white man the master of the world, its really about oil-money and about Bush being the appointed emporer of the world. He really does eat dead-iraqi-baby pudding as a snack as masterbates with crude oil and rolls around in all of his dirty oil money you know.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 11:11 PM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Mugtoe
Cuddly Puppy

Registered: Oct 2001
Location:
Posts: 18148

No. I think he meant that he quite agreed.

__________________
quote:
Originally posted by magnolia
never waste a hardon, trust a fart or pass up a breath mint when offered.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 11:41 PM
Mugtoe is online now Click Here to See the Profile for Mugtoe Click here to Send Mugtoe a Private Message Find more posts by Mugtoe Add Mugtoe to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Mugtoe
Cuddly Puppy

Registered: Oct 2001
Location:
Posts: 18148

At least I hope that's what he meant. Anyone, I mean ANYONE, who thinks we couldn't reduce that entire country to rubble in a matter of days hasn't been paying attention for the last couple of generations.

__________________
quote:
Originally posted by magnolia
never waste a hardon, trust a fart or pass up a breath mint when offered.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 11:43 PM
Mugtoe is online now Click Here to See the Profile for Mugtoe Click here to Send Mugtoe a Private Message Find more posts by Mugtoe Add Mugtoe to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Mugtoe
Cuddly Puppy

Registered: Oct 2001
Location:
Posts: 18148

Not that I can prove you wrong.

__________________
quote:
Originally posted by magnolia
never waste a hardon, trust a fart or pass up a breath mint when offered.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-02-2003 11:43 PM
Mugtoe is online now Click Here to See the Profile for Mugtoe Click here to Send Mugtoe a Private Message Find more posts by Mugtoe Add Mugtoe to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

if your right, Mugtoe, than I'm stupid for posting all that. Oh well, even stupid people can be right.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-03-2003 12:25 AM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Goatboy
the anticlimax

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: A New England
Posts: 9187

My issue would be with poorly trained soldiers shooting women and children (Hoo har!) and the use of fragmentation bombs in the city (which have killed a bunch) and (if they do it) use of DU within built up areas.

Sure, I agree, it could be a lot worse. Blue on blue incidents and coalition / civilian casualties are surprisingly low, considering. But having yet to hear a single good reason (from government) why we are going in to Iraq (though I can think of plenty good reasons myself), and the growing resentment to the US / UK within the arab world I am left wondering whether the ends will justify the means.

Though I see where you are coming from with your politic (though I think you close minded), you aren't ingesting the daily media ration of dead iraqi children that gets force fed to us in Spain (with some satisfaction from the independent spanish media outlets, who - like the people here, are rabidly against the war). Certainly if I had family there, evil dictator or no, I would be back in Iraq shooting coalition troops with my band of Minutemen. So I see these dead children and I have to continually ask if it i worth it.

__________________
Arbeit Macht Frei

Last edited by Goatboy on 04-03-2003 at 12:56 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-03-2003 12:52 PM
Goatboy is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Goatboy Click here to Send Goatboy a Private Message Find more posts by Goatboy Add Goatboy to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Goatboy
the anticlimax

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: A New England
Posts: 9187

As for your stats on Iraq and Saddam's rather depressingly profligate attitude with the lives of his citizens, Iraq is a sovereign nation, and I find our willingness to insert ourselves in their affairs for selfish reasons, without a mandate of approval from its (Iraqs) populace distasteful.

__________________
Arbeit Macht Frei

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-03-2003 01:03 PM
Goatboy is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Goatboy Click here to Send Goatboy a Private Message Find more posts by Goatboy Add Goatboy to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
cornelius
Quixotic landmass

Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Holy shit
Posts: 1083

According to my friends in Amman, more and more busloads of Iraqis are heading for the boarder to defend their country. They are predominantly exiles from Sadams regieme, yet are returning to stop the invasion of their homeland. Many of them are saying that Bush and Sadam are two sides of the same coin. I´d agree with them only so far as the invasion and bombing of a country and it´s people is no way to bring them democracy and freedom, unless they are occupied by some other foreign power. This least of all by a country that has behaved in the region with largely selfish motives up till now at least

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-03-2003 03:08 PM
cornelius is offline Click Here to See the Profile for cornelius Click here to Send cornelius a Private Message Find more posts by cornelius Add cornelius to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

The sovereignty of Iraq as a Nation depends on your defition of "sovereign". Sovereignty means that one has independence or self-rule and also power of state. In the US, (via the constitution and those willing to defend it on all levels), it is the individual citizen who is sovereign. Having the ability to elect his leaders, he has power of the state and having the very broad rights and freedoms defined in the constitution, he has independence and self-rule.

In my veiw, the only nations that are truly sovereign are those whos citizens are sovereign. There is no other acceptable state of affairs. This sovereignty of citizens within the US- our freedom- is what has made us the most powerfull and wealthy nation in the world. The more wealth and freedom there is in other nations, the more wealthy we in America will become and the safer we will be within our own borders. THAT is why we are at war.

As you may know, America has some different ideas about things than the UN does. This is reflected in our leadership and is due in large part to the lobbying of very many people such as myself.

Governments who have no constitution and whos citizens do not actually get to vote, and are not represented by their leaders, have NO PLACE being recognized by the UN as anything like legitimate sovereign nations. Rather, the UN needs to recognize Governments in exile of such nations- perhaps the reprentative oragization(s) of expatriots.

Once again, all the humanitarian stuff aside here is why the US is in Iraq:

The more wealth and freedom there is in other nations, the more wealthy we in America will become and the safer we will be within our own borders.

Iraqis have no voice, no way of expressing approval or disapproval of the coalition invasion to the UN or anyone else. There can be no "mandate of approval" from them because there is no internal Iraqi elected Iraqi body that represents them. The US led coalition is currently fighting so that the Iraqis will have the opportunity to freely form an elected body that represents them and from which they express mandates.

The reality of how Iraqis feel about the war will be shown when it is over and they are actually free to express themselves in a huge array of outlets. Even given civialian casualties, I have the funny feeling that they will feel that the war was much much much better than the alternative.

It is amazing to me that you can acknoweldge just how opressive and tyanical Hussein is and yet also say that somehow the Iraqis could express some type of uncoerced mandate.

It is equally amazing to me that anyone is actually against this war. Do they really think a few months of fighting to free Iraq is worse for the Iraqi people than many many years of brutal opression under the Hussein regime?

I personaly think that most people against this war hold their hatred of Bush and dislike for America as a higher priority than the actual welfare of the Iraqi people.

Not trying to beat up on you or your points, just truing to be straight. Thanks for the comments.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Last edited by Itch on 04-04-2003 at 08:21 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-04-2003 08:16 AM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35658

quote:
Originally posted by Itch
The sovereignty of Iraq as a Nation depends on your defition of "sovereign". Sovereignty means that one has independence or self-rule and also power of state. In the US, (via the constitution and those willing to defend it on all levels), it is the individual citizen who is sovereign. Having the ability to elect his leaders, he has power of the state and having the very broad rights and freedoms defined in the constitution, he has independence and self-rule.



I think that you are abusing the word 'sovereign' here; I can't see any reason at all to restrict 'sovereign' nation to those with democracy or at least sort of 'people rule'. 'Sovereign' is about power, as far as I am concerned, not where that power resides. What you are talking about is something different; Iraq is a sovereign nation (although less than it was before the Gulf war and the imposed conditions that followed from it), it has a government and recognised borders and all the rest. Just because you don't like their government doesn't change that.

__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-04-2003 08:34 AM
Smug Git is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Smug Git Click here to Send Smug Git a Private Message Find more posts by Smug Git Add Smug Git to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Goatboy
the anticlimax

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: A New England
Posts: 9187

I'll get back to this later itch as my computer time is somewhat limited.

But by mandate, I would have accepted insurgency, uprising, revolution.

__________________
Arbeit Macht Frei

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-04-2003 11:51 AM
Goatboy is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Goatboy Click here to Send Goatboy a Private Message Find more posts by Goatboy Add Goatboy to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

quote:
Originally posted by Smug Git
I think that you are abusing the word 'sovereign' here; I can't see any reason at all to restrict 'sovereign' nation to those with democracy or at least sort of 'people rule'. 'Sovereign' is about power, as far as I am concerned, not where that power resides. What you are talking about is something different; Iraq is a sovereign nation (although less than it was before the Gulf war and the imposed conditions that followed from it), it has a government and recognised borders and all the rest. Just because you don't like their government doesn't change that.


from the American Heritage Dictionary:

Sovereign:

NOUN: 1. One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit, as: a. A king, queen, or other noble person who serves as chief of state; a ruler or monarch. b. A national governing council or committee. 2. A nation that governs territory outside its borders. 3. A gold coin formerly used in Great Britain.
ADJECTIVE: 1. Self-governing; independent: a sovereign state. 2. Having supreme rank or power: a sovereign prince. 3. Paramount; supreme: Her sovereign virtue is compassion. 4a. Of superlative strength or efficacy: a sovereign remedy. b. Unmitigated: sovereign contempt.


I am hardly abusing the word "sovereign".

A new paradigm is being cast that goes a bit beyond what is happening in Iraq and it is being developed from new, less conventional and less conservative ways of thinking of things. On the surface this new paradigm may seem "conservative" because its cheif propagators are those usually labeled as such but indeed the paradigm its self is ultra-liberal in the most classical and true sense of the word.

It is nescessary to look with a very critical eye at just what Government is. What exactly defines "Government"? I would be curious to see what the criteria is for a "Government" to exist by UN standards.

Is anything "government" that sufficiently cows its population into submission and has fixed borders? What is "all the rest"?

The criteria for the legitimacy of government needs to be based on the degree to which the same government is the self-government of the nations people. A representative, elected body of individuals who abide by a constitution that has likewise been ratified by elected representatives of the same people.

If this is the path America takes in its foreign policy percpetive than it can be fairly said that the US is attempting to remake other countries in its own image. We are the most secure, wealthy and perhaps also most free nation in the world. That we should do what we can to make other nations as wealthy, secure and free as we are is something that I not only call good policy that is in our own best interests but also the right thing to do as it does the most good for the most people.

Those are my thoughts anyways.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-04-2003 05:13 PM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itch
De Oppresso Liber

Registered: Jul 2001
Location:
Posts: 543

quote:
Originally posted by Goatboy
I'll get back to this later itch as my computer time is somewhat limited.

But by mandate, I would have accepted insurgency, uprising, revolution.



hmmm.... would either the Shi'a or the Kurdish uprisings qualify as a "mandate"? Both uprisings were BRUTALY supressed and thousands of Kurds and Shi'a were murdered. If an uprising is put down in such a way does said uprising still count as a mandate? What percentage of the population has to be involved in an uprising for it to be considered a "mandate"? How do you find this percentage? If these are the questions that have to be answered before military action is taken in such a situation, they better be answered quick before another few weeks pass and literaly thousands more civlians die under the regime in question.

Once again, not trying to be a dick, just trying to ask the hard questions, the ones that need answered most.

__________________
World-freedom is as unlikely as world-peace because of free will. Many will choose to be unfree and many will choose to use force.
It only makes sense then that those who want to be free choose to also be the ones who use force. Why? Because freedom is better. It's that simple.


Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 04-04-2003 05:23 PM
Itch is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itch Click here to Send Itch a Private Message Find more posts by Itch Add Itch to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote