They say the people have nothing to eat. No produce is going into the city and the water has been cut off for days and days. Do you know what it's like to have no clean water??? People are drinking contaminated water and coming down with diarrhoea and other diseases. There are corpses in the street because no one can risk leaving their home to bury people. Families are burying children and parents in the gardens of their homes. WHERE IS EVERYONE???
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.unix-girl.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1396
[comment from ip 168.10.46.125 by someone claiming to be dave deleted]
#Go over there and help, kasia.
#They're not letting in humanitarian aid, but they would let me in?
#The Republicans, apparently, have it all figured out since the only leg they've been standing on since the 9/11 Report was released was how this was a war to save the people of Iraq from the ravages of Saddam. You know, a Humanitarian War since no WMDs could be found to save their asses. I mean, they do have a solid track record for leading humanitarian efforts, no?
#'Baghdad Burning'
I assume you and the other blogger mean Falluja burning. I can find no source about Baghdad burning. Falluja is about 40 miles to the west of Baghdad.
You really can't help the people still there while fighting is going on in Falluja (since the helpers would have a good chance of being shot). Now that the fighting is over, humanitarian efforts are starting:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/14/iraq.aid/index.html
#"Baghdad Burning" is the title of the weblog, yes, she does mean Fallujah.
#Saw this video of Falluja fighting over on Fark... pretty intense.
http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/falluja.asf
Unfortunately the comments quickly turned into a flame war and aren't worth reading (big surprise).
#The Democrats were all in favor of keeping in place the ineffective sanctions which Saddam subverted to allow himself to prosper while children starved.
BTW, Republicans fought against slavery, Democrats were for the status quo.
The track records are clear.
#"BTW, Republicans fought against slavery"
different bunch of Republicans from what I can gather
they are long dead
of course it took America a loooooong time before civil rights
one might note that the reason that slavery was abolished in most parts of the world came down to a question of economics
anyway back on subject
this is not the first time during this war that water has become polluted as a result, I have read it in many places, this is just the latest installment
every time I have seen it blogged the trolls are out in force
unfortunatly I have not seen iraq being "liberated"
I think the country is in a worse state now than ever before
and it has little hope of becoming stable
http://www.progressive.org/0801issue/nagy0901.html
#'of course it took America a loooooong time before civil rights'
And I would point out that Republicans did their part. In the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34 and Democrats 152 to 96 in the House. Southern Democrats are the ones who voted against it.
In the Senate, it was a Conservative Republican Everett McKinley Dirksen who is given credit to getting the bill past the Southern Democrats fillbuster.
'I think the country (Iraq) is in a worse state now than ever before and it has little hope of becoming stable'
We will see, with the US Election over, Bush is now in a better position to work on the problem. 1,200 dead insurgents in Fallujah is a good start.
#It's important to remember that the parties as we know them now were not the parties that they used to be. Judging current democrats and republican on the actions taken by other party members 40 years ago isn't appropriate since most of those people are dead. It would be about as fair calling Polish people communists since their country used to be controlled by the Soviet Union.
And from what I can tell, civil rights is an ongoing battle that goes beyond racial lines. We still have gender inequalities in salaries, for example - and inequalities across the board in education.
As for Baghdad ... well, like Bush or not, like the war or not ... it's a mess over there and the US has contributed to that mess by overthrowing the government. History will judge if this was a good thing or not - I'm going to wait 50 years for the real facts to come out before I fully decide. In the mean time, the US owes the world a clean up effort. That country has no effective government at this point and will implode without US help -- the US might not be making everything better, but if the troops all came home tomorrow it would be a LOT worse.
#'It's important to remember that the parties as we know them now were not the parties that they used to be.'
All true. I guess my beef is, if you listen to the left, is that the Republican Party cares little for civil rights and never did. Since the 60s the Dems have moved harder to the left and the Repubs to the right.
If only the Dems would listen to Clinton and move toward the center, they would win some elections. Clinton learned his lesson in 94 and moved toward the center after his first two years in office. You would think after the Dems have lost I believe 7 out of the last 10 Pres elections, they would figure this out and change their leadership.
As for Iraq, again I agree. While the WMDs don't seem to be there, this Oil for Food mess at the UN could turn out to be big.
And I still don't think we have the full story on the WMDs. If it was just the US and England who thought the WMDs were there, I would think it was a mistake on US\English intelligence. However, the UN, France, Germany and Russia also thought that WMDs were there and all of them were in bed with Saddam (as the UN Oil for Food is really starting to show). I have a hard time believing that all the major powers were wrong. It is going to take a long time to sort this out.
You are right again about the clean up. Kerry saw that. Had he won we wouldn't be getting out of Iraq anytime soon (despite what the anti-war part of the left would believe).
#I never believed WMD. As soon as the whole Iraq debate started I was sure that whatever the REAL reason for the invasion was, they weren't telling us. Both our political parties are *very* good at manipulating the media and public opinion. As I've said many times, I'm going to wait 50 years for the vaults to get unsealed and the truth to really come out - if it ever does. The historians are going to have to sort this mess out.
I also predicted the war on terror will last at least 20 years. Anyone want to put a nickle on that?
#I can in no way justify what we have done. And I see the lives of thousands on both sides affected in the most terrible ways and death is only one of the ways. The hate is growing as it was fully known it would. We have fallen into a very dark period in our history.
#As far as a 20year war, it is apparent the Europeans and China will create a situation of economic sanctions on us because of our actions and isolationism and we will be lucky to be a world force in 20 years and not a third world country. Our resources and wealth are only going one way and it is not up.
#"We will see, with the US Election over, Bush is now in a better position to work on the problem. 1,200 dead insurgents in Fallujah is a good start."
You think *THAT* is a good start? Guess you won't be 100% happy until Iraq's population is reduced to 0 then...?
Try to understand *why* they are fighting against the *occupation*. I doubt that USA's population would meet an army from Europe, to remove your president, with cheers & joy...
When Norway was occupied by nazi-Germany soon a lot of anti-occupation forces started warfare against the occupants. And all of them are heros now. For example some destroyed a plant for creating heavy-water (to be used to create nuclear bombs).
#Riiight. So you also probably think North Koreans would hate to see Kim Jong Il go too.
#Whoa! The needle on my mindless dogma detector is way over in the red. I better get out of here before stones starts flying from both sides of the aisle.
[Exeunt]
#Paula needs to take her medication.
#Dave:
I haven't read much about how the situation is in North-Korea, except that they have severe famine and the majority of the population suffers from the misule of their president(or what's his title?). But YES, I guess most of them still would not welcome an American attack, because they "don't know any better".
The government probably tells the population a lot of lies to cover up for the bad situation. Same as how your government is covering up how the war in Iraq is going on... for example deciding to show one video with success instead of a clip of something bad.
For example a lot of the population in the former country DDR (you know, East-Germany) didn't know much about how life was in West-Europe. Some years ago I met a teacher from DDR who didn't even know that there existed a country named Norway, until the wall was teared down.
I'm not arguing that they are good leaders or anything nice, but that there are much better ways to solve the problem. At least the 14454+ dead Iraqis (RIP! see www.iraqbodycount.net) had a life before USA decided to free them...
Power to the peaceful!
#You can subtract that number from the MILLIONS of Iraqi people that Saddam killed. A great many Iraqis are alive today because Saddam is no longer in power.
The US government isn't covering anything up. We have a FREE PRESS. North Korean does not. Iraq did not.
I know several Iraqi immigrants here (they got out while Saddam was still in power). They are all overjoyed that Saddam is no longer in power and are satisfied with what the US is doing.
#Your free press is free as in they can do whatever they want to do (as long as they obey privacy laws etc.). And they do what follows their own best interests. Read: http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Media_control and read more about media control.
There are a lot of different ways a government can control the media. Some are very obvious (see North-Korea), while other ways are more subtile...
Here you can read how free the US media is: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=10003 (Annual 2004 Report by 'Reporters with no borders'). Sorry to destroy your illusion of a press which tells you everything about what happens around the world...
Wow. I step away from the thread that I thought was over for a few days and it springs to life...
> 'You think *THAT* is a good start?'
Yep. 1,200 fighters not attacking the US solders and Iraq population is a great start.
> 'Try to understand *why* they are fighting against the *occupation*.'
It's easy to understand. At a high level: The main reason is that Saddam's people (The Arab Sunni Muslims, a minority, about 20% of the pop, in the country) held rule over all of Iraq with a Iron Fist. They don't want to lose power and are fighting to keep it.
Many areas outside of the 'Sunni Triangle' as the press calls it, has been quiet, under control and waiting for elections since the fall of Saddam.
The Shiite community (about 60% of the pop) have been bugging the UN and the US for elections since April 2003. If you recall, they asked the UN to check if it could be held sooner Jan 2005. The Persian Sunni Muslim (about 20% of the pop) in the north has also been waiting for elections and are the most pro-US.
So you have about 80% of the Iraqs not openly fighting the US, understand that it is generally a good thing that Saddam is gone and the US is in Iraq and is waiting elections. And 20% of the Iraqs who held all of the power fighting the US because they fear what will happen if the people they beat on for so many years get power over them.
There are sub-plots, but that's the what is going on at the high level.
---
> 'It is apparent the Europeans and China will
> create a situation of economic sanctions on us
> because of our actions and isolationism '
Never happen. China and Europe would be hurting their countries more then the US if they did that. Our economies are tied together now. Who is going to buy all the stuff that China and Europe makes for the US? Get out of the 1970s.
---
>'I also predicted the war on terror will last at
> least 20 years. Anyone want to put a nickle on
> that?'
If we can define what the 'War On Terror' is I might put a nickle on that...
#Actually the EU's economy is largely underated by the Americans. As of June 2004 the EU's combined GDP was 9 trillion compared to USA's 10 trillion - that's not much of a gap. And the EU just added 10 new countries this year (figured in the GDP calculation) - all Eastern Europen countries whose potential for economic growth is enormous. Add in how poorly the dollar is against the Euro these days, and the USA could very well fall to #2 on the world list of economic powers.
Of course, the Americans bury their head in the sand on this one by comparing themselves to each EU country separately. The thing is, the EU *does* act as a unit when it comes to economic matter, including its behavior in the WTO and other economic bodies.
It's possible that US policy makers are on the ball here and only the public naive (since economic policy garners much less veiwer ratings on the evening news that J-Lo's antics), but I have to wonder. The US could get a big surprise if it's not careful.
Of particular note, the US currently *borrows* about 500 BILLION dolars annually from the EU and other nations, just to make ends meet. Imagine how the US economy would sputter if the EU decided to cut that back by a few hundred billion per year.
Hey! I'll take the nickle bet and we can work out the meaning of "War on Terror" later. See you in 2022! (And no, I don't mean 2022 factorial).
#pbw: Of course they want elections, which hopefully means that the occupation ends quicker. Then they can decide themself if they really wants all the laws the occupation has put down on them.
Examples of laws introduced by their nice occupation government are listed here: http://www.export.gov/iraq/bus_climate/overview_cpa.html
CPA Order no. 81 is something all US companies cheer for, while the Iraqi farmers weeps. ( http://www.grain.org/articles/?id=6 )
And CPA order no. 39 means that big multi-national companies can by all the industry of the poor country (ooh oil plants ;)).
I understand very well why they want an election ASAP.
Btw. have you read about this http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1357699,00.html in your free press over there? It could of course just be by coincidence, and the vitnesses misunderstood what they saw, or something like that. (could only find references to it from indymedia-sites, and none of the 'normal' newspapers... but try to google for "N379P"(reg. nr. of the gulfstream and you'll find lot's of sites referring to it)
#Andreas:
I find little problem with most of those laws. Regardless, do you really think that Arab Sunni Muslims (the only group fighting the US) are fighting and dieing over the new laws governing grain?
They are fighting (mostly) because they are afraid that the Shiites and other groups are going to kick their ass after an election and they take power.
As for the other link about the US shipping people off to other countries for torture, that is old news in the US. However, until someone can give some real proof, it is not going to get heavy air time in the US.
Paul:
Europe has its own problems slowing it down. One of which going forward is the falling dollar:
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?Story_id=3394596
(Might have to pay for that link soon...)
If Europe would cut back its lending, the dollar would fall more and hurt Europe's already softer economy. A weak dollar makes European and Asian exports more expensive and less competitive in the US.
So again, all of these economies are strongly tied together.
As for the bet, I don't think a nickel is enough. It should be some increment of $16.65 (old joke)
#By the time the future answers these questions, we will be living in the ramifications for centuries. I wish I could make a case for our economy surviving as a world force. Unfortunately, we are doing more to hurt ourselves than the terrorist factions. They will just be another nail! Have not even touched the environmental issues at stake, medical care, soc sec., natural resources etc etc.
#Just for clarification, I served in the Armed Forces and could easily be called up again and would support the military objective (even if I did not agree with the political objective). I have no political party affiliations. I chose not to put up links to justify my position as it is derived from much study from many sources on both sides of the issues and it is only my opinion. I do respect differing opinions and you will get them even from the soldiers over there now.
#