Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 07-20-2005, 07:12 AM

stevo:

the report i cited was released yesterday and represents one of the first attempts to provide a context (in terms of "collateral damage") of this misbeggoten colonial adventure in iraq. if you actually read the report--you will see that it is not about "painting the u.s. as the great satan" as you would prefer to believe.
better to read the report, then respond.
it's not long and there are lots of pictures.
the report is not "civilian deaths caused by americans" but rather civilian casualties in iraq since 2003 in general. it includes the insurgency. geez.

the war in iraq is not an abstract theater against which from time to time happyface stories of indivudal heroism emerge--it is a nasty brutal war situation in which lots of people who are as real and important as you or me are killed or maimed.

the material you post is a non sequitor--what you are obviously interested in doing is reverting to the only remaining defense of the iraq war the bush administration has left--that hussein was a bad man (an american-supported bad man from his ascension to power through the end of the iran war, btw--an american supported and armed bad guy whose actions were at no time seen in themselves as constituting a contradiction with "american values" or any other such empty nonsensical slogan---until the invasion of kuwait--at which point, in a very 1984 way, everything suddenly changed)

and the response is obvious--the americans have installed, supported, propped up regimes far worse than saddam hussein
think mobutu in what was zaire for example--the americans were behind the assasination of patrice lumumba and supported mobutu, one of the bloodiest dictators in a particularly bloody area--not a fucking word of protest from the americans on the basis of body count--how was someone like him not problematic?---simple--the brutality of a regime supported for other reasons by the americans is never--ever--bad enough to change american policy--but if that policy is changed for other reasons, then the body count becomes politically significant. that is how things have gone, that is how things are.
and the examples couild be multiplied--think about the period of military dictatorship in chile and argentina during the 1970s-1980s.
think saddam hussein's human rights record from the period before the invasion of kuwait, for another example.

no-one is saying, here or elsewhere, who opposes and opposed the war in iraq that hussein was a great guy--but do not even try to pretend that human rights abuse constitutes a fundamental point in the shaping of american policy. it is a tool that the americans use to justify actions the logic of which operates on other grounds. period.

07-20-2005, 07:12 AM	#156 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	stevo: the report i cited was released yesterday and represents one of the first attempts to provide a context (in terms of "collateral damage") of this misbeggoten colonial adventure in iraq. if you actually read the report--you will see that it is not about "painting the u.s. as the great satan" as you would prefer to believe. better to read the report, then respond. it's not long and there are lots of pictures. the report is not "civilian deaths caused by americans" but rather civilian casualties in iraq since 2003 in general. it includes the insurgency. geez. the war in iraq is not an abstract theater against which from time to time happyface stories of indivudal heroism emerge--it is a nasty brutal war situation in which lots of people who are as real and important as you or me are killed or maimed. the material you post is a non sequitor--what you are obviously interested in doing is reverting to the only remaining defense of the iraq war the bush administration has left--that hussein was a bad man (an american-supported bad man from his ascension to power through the end of the iran war, btw--an american supported and armed bad guy whose actions were at no time seen in themselves as constituting a contradiction with "american values" or any other such empty nonsensical slogan---until the invasion of kuwait--at which point, in a very 1984 way, everything suddenly changed) and the response is obvious--the americans have installed, supported, propped up regimes far worse than saddam hussein think mobutu in what was zaire for example--the americans were behind the assasination of patrice lumumba and supported mobutu, one of the bloodiest dictators in a particularly bloody area--not a fucking word of protest from the americans on the basis of body count--how was someone like him not problematic?---simple--the brutality of a regime supported for other reasons by the americans is never--ever--bad enough to change american policy--but if that policy is changed for other reasons, then the body count becomes politically significant. that is how things have gone, that is how things are. and the examples couild be multiplied--think about the period of military dictatorship in chile and argentina during the 1970s-1980s. think saddam hussein's human rights record from the period before the invasion of kuwait, for another example. no-one is saying, here or elsewhere, who opposes and opposed the war in iraq that hussein was a great guy--but do not even try to pretend that human rights abuse constitutes a fundamental point in the shaping of american policy. it is a tool that the americans use to justify actions the logic of which operates on other grounds. period. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 07-20-2005 at 07:19 AM..