When, exactly, do we start accepting responsibility? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

smooth · 05-06-2003, 09:41 PM

Quote:

While American experts say there is no telling what may have been looted from a nuclear research facility in Baghdad, an Iraqi nuclear engineer who was one of the founders of the facility says he has witnessed the spread of nuclear contamination firsthand.

The U.S. Central Command acknowledges that the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center – the headquarters of Saddam Hussein's former nuclear program, with hundreds of buildings covering an area of 120 acres – was looted.

Major newspapers such as the Washington Post and the New York Times have reported that U.S. officials do not know what if anything is missing from the center, which sits on a bend in the Tigris River 11 miles south of Baghdad.

But Dr. Hamid Al-Bah'ly, a founder of Tuwaitha who has worked there since 1968, told Al-Jazeera television's "Iraq After the War" program that nuclear materials have already spread far beyond the center.

Small units of U.S. Marine engineers arrived at the nuclear Center on April 6, after Iraqi forces withdrew following the fall of Baghdad. But they were unable to prevent looting by Iraqi civilians, who got in by cutting the barbed-wire fence surrounding the site.

According to the Associated Press, a U.N. expert familiar with nuclear inspections said the Marines made matters worse by apparently breaking U.N. seals designed to ensure that the materials did not end up in wrong hands or be diverted for weapons use. The center contained several tons of radioactive material placed in hundreds of barrels sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a U.N. nuclear watchdog group.

Al-Jazeera reporters in anti-radiation orange suits interviewed some of the center's employees as they tried to chase away the looters. The workers complained about the lack of American military presence at the facility. One said that there were only two American tanks protecting the entire site, hardly enough to stop the looting.

Al-Bah'ly entered the center soon after the looting and saw chilling scenes. Some of the radioactive material had been taken out of the center, and other materials had been dumped on the floor by looters. Some of the radioactive material was in powder form and had probably dispersed into the air through broken windows, Al-Bah'ly said.

Some of the looters stole big containers that could potentially hold anywhere between 300-400 kilograms of radioactive uranium. Some of the containers were empty but others were not. Al-Bah'ly says he thinks the river has been contaminated by people washing out the containers.

Al-Bah'ly inspects about four to five homes daily in the neighborhood of Tuwaitha, and says he saw some people using the containers to store water, milk and tomatoes, oblivious of the risks. Some containers were even used to transport milk to yogurt factories. Abu Dhabi Television has shown scenes of women using the containers to store drinking water.

At one home, Al-Bah'ly discovered radioactive contamination in clothes and beds. He describes a 10-year-old girl who had attached a piece of "yellow cake" (radioactive waste) to the edge of her skirt for decoration.

Al-Jazerra reports that in some homes, Al-Bah'ly recorded radiation levels 500 to 600 times higher than acceptable levels.

Al'Bahly, who works without protective gear, says he is willing risk his own health as he tries to monitor the spread of nuclear contamination. He says he hopes that the United States and IAEA will soon get actively involved in the effort to contain what may end up being an environmental catastrophe with devastating consequences for both Iraqi civilians and American servicemen and women.

maximusveritas · 05-06-2003, 09:59 PM

the last few paragraphs disgusted me. how could we let this happen? I hope this isn't true.

Easytiger · 05-06-2003, 10:12 PM

Human nature dictates that we take responsibility as late as possible and get rid of it as early as possible.

Dragonlich · 05-07-2003, 12:00 AM

Well... being totally cynical: the Iraqis looted the place, not the US.

Seriously, if the Iraqis don't understand a "danger" sign in their own language, combined with some nasty skulls and radiation signs... why should I care? One would assume they'd be more intelligent than this.

I could ask "When, exactly, do the Iraqis start acting rationally?", or even "When, exactly, do the Iraqis start accepting responibility for their own country?"

But I guess it's easier to blame the Americans for not being everywhere at once...

Liquor Dealer · 05-07-2003, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dragonlich
Well... being totally cynical: the Iraqis looted the place, not the US.

Seriously, if the Iraqis don't understand a "danger" sign in their own language, combined with some nasty skulls and radiation signs... why should I care? One would assume they'd be more intelligent than this.

I could ask "When, exactly, do the Iraqis start acting rationally?", or even "When, exactly, do the Iraqis start accepting responibility for their own country?"

But I guess it's easier to blame the Americans for not being everywhere at once...

I cannot think of a more perfect response - especially coming from a European in reply to an American's invitation to criticize the U.S. government. Thanks Dragonlich. I for one appreciate your response.

maximusveritas · 05-07-2003, 07:50 AM

They were very quick to secure the oil fields, but not a nuclear facility?

Don't give me that BS about the Iraqis taking responsibility.
Under the Geneva Convention, the US, as the occupying power, has an obligation to ensure the safety of the civilian population.

I'm still not convinced all of the allegations made in the article are true, but if they are, the US surely bears some of the responsibility.

Liquor Dealer · 05-07-2003, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by maximusveritas
......... the US, as the occupying power, has an obligation to ensure the safety of the civilian population.

If I am not totally misinformed one does not become an 'occupying power' until victory has been declared. It is my understanding that this has not happened yet and most definitely had not been declared at the time of this action.

smooth · 05-07-2003, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquor Dealer
If I am not totally misinformed one does not become an 'occupying power' until victory has been declared. It is my understanding that this has not happened yet and most definitely had not been declared at the time of this action.

Interesting that you would latch onto that as an excuse...that was the reasoning behind Bush declaring the "conflict won" yet "the war is not over." Of course, that was my point.

At what point in time does our government (and the people supporting this action) begin to take _some_ responsibility. Oh, you can continue to claim "we can't do _everything_" yet it's becoming obvious that our troops should be doing _something_. But hey, let me appeal to something you might give a shit about--the spread of nuclear waste doesn't just affect the stupid, irrational Iraqi people who are using the barrels to hold food and water, it also adversely affects the health of our troops.

That's right, even you agree there are some 30,000 humans that are _deserving_ of your attention--even if you couldn't care less about the Iraqis (which seems strange given the point of the war has shifted to being for the good of the Iraqi people). But don't let hypocrasy stop you now--at least concede some concern for the troops.

edit: all "you"s after the first paragraph are directed towards "our government (and the people supporting this action)" in general -- not LD or Dragonlich. My apologies to anyone who thought they were directed towards anyone in particular -- shoulda been more clear.

Lebell · 05-07-2003, 08:54 AM

FOLKS

Please make your points without slipping into personal vindictive.

Thanks

Dragonlich · 05-07-2003, 10:46 AM

The US forces *are* doing something. They're in fact doing a lot. You just don't hear about it, because it's not news if all is going okay. You hear about incidents like this, not about the nuclear plants that were *not* looted when US troops protected it.

I think an occupying force should take responsibility for the safety of the population as soon as the fighting stops in that area. However, I wonder against *what* they have to protect the people? I don't think you can expect the US forces to protect the Iraqis from their own stupidity... At what point do the Iraqis take responsibility to protect themselves? And at what point are the US forces allowed to stop protecting? After all, if it goes all the way, the US would be responsible for Iraqi kids cutting themselves while playing, for example... unrealistic (and a stupid example, of course).

Oh, and Smooth... if the TFP hadn't crashed, you might have read my rant about how I don't give a rat's arse about both the Iraqis and the US soldiers; I'm Dutch, after all, and both countries are far away. I care about my friends and family, not about some idiot in Iraq that thinks he can ignore warnings about nuclear waste... Let me ask you this: would YOU use containers with nuclear waste to store water??? No, of course you wouldn't! That is *personal responsibility*, something the Iraqis should try for a change.

smooth · 05-07-2003, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dragonlich
Oh, and Smooth... if the TFP hadn't crashed, you might have read my rant about how I don't give a rat's arse about both the Iraqis and the US soldiers; I'm Dutch, after all, and both countries are far away. I care about my friends and family, not about some idiot in Iraq that thinks he can ignore warnings about nuclear waste... Let me ask you this: would YOU use containers with nuclear waste to store water??? No, of course you wouldn't! That is *personal responsibility*, something the Iraqis should try for a change.

Of course I wouldn't as long as I knew how to read the warning signs. Of course that doesn't apply to people who don't know how to read or haven't been taught the meaning of a nuclear waste sign--one of the human rights abuses of Saddam was that he kept women and children from being educated (or at least only educated according to his mandate), correct?

Besides, the article isn't clear but it appears that soldiers may have _removed_ or at least tampered with the UN signs.

Quote:

According to the Associated Press, a U.N. expert familiar with nuclear inspections said the Marines made matters worse by apparently breaking U.N. seals designed to ensure that the materials did not end up in wrong hands or be diverted for weapons use.

I realize the soldiers are doing a lot. Unfortunately, when things like this, bomb demolition mishaps, and relic looting come to light the typical response has been, "That's not our fault, the Iraqi people need to take responsiblity." This attitude conflicts (at least appears to) with our stated motive of being in Iraq for the betterment of the Iraqi people.

I'm not _blaming_ the soldiers for this--I'm questioning the attitude in the typical response. The title actually derives from the lenghty current discussion regarding or responsibilities concerning the relic looting. So far, when things have gone good we take credit yet when mistakes happen we blameshift--I don't think that's appropriate. It might surprise you that more than one group of people can take responsibility for a mishap

. (e.g. _whoever_ was to blame is irrelevant, it's time to get our asses in gear to clean up the mess and ensure a similar problem doesn't arise elsewhere--hopefully this won't turn into a vietnam-agent orange/land mine episode where birth deformities and deaths still occur yet our government denies responsibility and aid to the people).

Daval · 05-07-2003, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by maximusveritas
They were very quick to secure the oil fields, but not a nuclear facility?

Don't give me that BS about the Iraqis taking responsibility.
Under the Geneva Convention, the US, as the occupying power, has an obligation to ensure the safety of the civilian population.

I'm still not convinced all of the allegations made in the article are true, but if they are, the US surely bears some of the responsibility.

Grin, I could not think of a more perfect response than this one. (smile Liquor Dealer)

Dragonlich · 05-07-2003, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
Of course I wouldn't as long as I knew how to read the warning signs. Of course that doesn't apply to people who don't know how to read or haven't been taught the meaning of a nuclear waste sign--one of the human rights abuses of Saddam was that he kept women and children from being educated (or at least only educated according to his mandate), correct?

Besides, the article isn't clear but it appears that soldiers may have _removed_ or at least tampered with the UN signs.

1) Even in Iraq, dangerous places have warning signs with skulls, and signs in their local language stating that it's dangerous.
2) I actually don't know about that education thing, but I *thought* the Iraqi women were as educated as the men, if only because Iraq was a secular, socialist country. If these women were uneducated (because they're shi'ites), it wasn't Saddam's fault, but their husbands' and village elders'.
3) The UN signs were *seals*; I doubt any looter would have stopped because of some stupid UN seal... Sorry, to me this is a non-issue.

Finally, if the US is to help the Iraqi people, the first thing they need to do is give the Iraqi people the means and *motivation* to help themselves. It simply won't work otherwise. FYI, after WW2, when we in the Netherlands were liberated, we didn't start looting or protesting against the liberators; we partied, and then went to work, to rebuild the country. We got help in the form of the Marshall plan, but we did most of the work ourselves. I don't see why the Iraqis can't do the same. Well, I do see that, of course: they're used to being told what to do, and to not take the initiative, after 30 years of dictatorship... But they have to change, or they will not succeed.

smooth · 05-07-2003, 10:06 PM

Whatever, the excuses really are getting old...and a definate pattern is emerging.

US troops 'encouraged' Iraqi looters

http://tfproject.org/tfp/showthread....&threadid=5538

Dragonlich · 05-07-2003, 11:35 PM

...as are the comments of the armchair generals/policemen, who think that every reported incident is true, and proof of a wider picture, and who know exactly what the US should have done... At the same time, they jump on every report dismissing their side of the argument, claiming it's propaganda or just plain lies. (Yes, this goes both ways.)

I suggest we all wait a few months to learn the truth about some stories we're all getting worked up about. The museum looting is already being played down, and I suspect other stories will be too.

boatin · 05-07-2003, 11:44 PM

Imagine an American in Britain crossing the street. Traffic runs the opposite way, and Americans get killed every year stepping off the curb. Does a local have any responsibility to stop that person if they can? Or should they just say "it’s a grown person, he can read a sign, and it’s evolution in action..."??

Does a person have any moral responsibility to stop someone from hurting themselves? What is so freaking hard about accepting some responsibility? And more relevantly for TFP, can’t anyone on the other ‘side’ acknowledge this point? No one is going to take your birthday away if you say “yep, more planning would have been good. They really screwed this part up”.

The administration sold war to the American people, spent billions of dollars, removed Saddam (a good thing), and we claim to be helping the people beyond removing Saddam. And we couldn't ask "what things are at risk as the war winds down?"

That's ludicrous. A project manager with a mediocre budget could have identified a hundred ways to fix the impending problems and have a beneficial impact on the country and the people. And no, I’m not naïve enough to think that it’s easy. It’s just that it doesn’t seem to have received any effort at all.

This is, of course, brought to you by the people who brought you "gulf war (I) syndrome" and budget cuts to Veteran Affairs.

Of course they don't care about the 30,000 troops. But lip service is all that matters, right? Oh, yeah, and being right.

I apologize for the rant, but this is disgraceful.

Dragonlich · 05-08-2003, 12:58 AM

Boatin... you *assume* there was no planning, and I think you're wrong. No, I *know* you're wrong. The US forces are doing a great job, but if you just focus on the things that go wrong, it's obvious you're going to feel they've done a bad job.

Have you heard anything about mass lootings in Iraq in the past week, or the week before? As far as I can tell, it's died down quite a bit. The other day, news reports said about 50 pro-saddam guys stormed a local government office in some village in Iraq.... The local police stepped in, and the people dispersed. That's good news, isn't it?

In the case of the moral responsibility to stop someone hurting themselves: is that a demand, or a preference? How do you stop people from doing stupid things in Iraq, when it's obvious you can't stop people from that in the US itself?

Now, think about this: before the war, Saddam released most of the country's criminals, as a gesture of good will to his people. With all those common criminals running around, wouldn't it be normal that crime goes up when the war ends? You cannot expect the US forces to solve that problem overnight, especially with many police records burned during the looting...

sixate · 05-08-2003, 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dragonlich
Have you heard anything about mass lootings in Iraq in the past week, or the week before? As far as I can tell, it's died down quite a bit. The other day, news reports said about 50 pro-saddam guys stormed a local government office in some village in Iraq.... The local police stepped in, and the people dispersed. That's good news, isn't it?

It's not good enough for smooth. As far as he's concerned we can do no right. If the Iraqi people wanna steal this shit and contaminate their own environment I say let them do it if they're that dumb. What reason would we have to think these people would have done that?

The reason the oil fields were secured so quickly was to make sure that they weren't set on fire and destroyed. That's about the only thing that they have to make any money. Why would we think they would loot a nuclear plant? Fuck, I didn't even think they were that dumb, but obviously they are. It's impossible to know what these people were going to do. To blame the US is just rediculous. The funny thing is people like smooth make our government out to be worse than Saddam. Gimme a break.

smooth · 05-08-2003, 11:31 AM

That's a straw man you're burning there Sixate -- no response necessary.

Dragonlich, if we wait long enough I'm quite sure my government's administration will be able to downplay every negative aspect of the war.

Anyway, I'm not an armchair general and I haven't "jumped" on every report. Step back and look at the broader picture yourself and a definate trend emerges--once again (as I suspect you didn't catch it the first time), my "issue" is more with your attitude than the actions. I understand the actions were unforseen, now why the antagonism towards the Iraqi people (the people we are supposed to be helping, btw)?

Just look above at all the filth and hatred that spilled out of Sixate's computer (nothing's good enough for smooth, smooth equates the US government with Saddam, the Iraqi people are so dumb who can possibly know what they'll do next...). These are the people who claimed altruistic motives a few weeks ago.

drewg · 05-08-2003, 12:07 PM

Accusing the Iraqi people of being stupid, because Iraqi criminals go around looting in the absence of police, is not right. Criminals are criminals, and when there's noone to enforce the law, criminals can do as they want to.

And comparing the "liberation" of Iraq to the liberation of countries like France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Norway after WW2 is not correct either. Back in 1945 we were liberated from an occupying foreign power (who when they invaded actually claimed they were liberators who came to protect us from France and England). Iraq is being "liberated" from their own government, so you can't really expect the same reaction (and also, Iraqi people does not have the same sense of unity, that for example the dutch and the norwegians have) . And before their is a real democratic Iraqi government in place in Iraq, and the coalition forces have pulled out, the US and Britain are still occupying forces.

Now, I don't expect that the coalition can handle all cases of looting, and I know they're trying to put an end to the looting gangs and restore law and order. But they're are also oblidged to do this as an occypying power, and if they don't get the job done properly, people should voice their consern. I don't think we really should panic and start to point out the blame yet, since it's not so long ago since the end of the Baath party. But if the coalition failes to restore law and order and create an Iraqi democracy after a longer period of time, they will not have kept what they promised and what they are obliged to do, and should be held responsible for that.

I think we should wait a while and see how it goes for a few months, so we'll have a clearer view of what the situation is like under the new American/British occupation.

sixate · 05-08-2003, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
if we wait long enough I'm quite sure my government's administration will be able to downplay every negative aspect of the war.

And you'll always downplay every positive aspect of the war. Wait a minute. You don't think there is one. I'm done cause I think we could argue for days about every political topic. Do you think it's possible for two people to be any more different than what we are?

Dragonlich · 05-08-2003, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
Anyway, I'm not an armchair general and I haven't "jumped" on every report. Step back and look at the broader picture yourself and a definate trend emerges--once again (as I suspect you didn't catch it the first time), my "issue" is more with your attitude than the actions. I understand the actions were unforseen, now why the antagonism towards the Iraqi people (the people we are supposed to be helping, btw)?

I did catch it the first time, and wasn't even aiming all my guns at you... There are other people in this thread who do not have your issues, and they sort of mess up the bilateral discussion. But that was to be expected.

I am antagonistic against *some* Iraqis... look at it this way: the US has come over to remove their oppressor, and to bring democracy and human rights. What do they get in return? Shi'ites protesting against the US, even though without them, they wouldn't have been able to go on their holy pilgrimage where they protested. Gangs looting everything they can get their hands on, and Iraqis protesting the US for not stopping them. People protesting the US for not providing clean water, electricity, and many other essential goods, even though they went without those things for *two years* after the last gulf war. People storming a US compound, demanding they leave, resulting in a bloodbath after someone started shooting. And now, Iraqi people looting dangerous things from a nuclear compound, and everyone blaming the US for not stopping them...

Many Iraqis can only seem to whine and complain, while waiting for the US to solve all their problems (and leaving ASAP, of course). It's understandable because of their background (living under a dictatorship like Saddam's does that to you), but it has to change. *They* have to take responsibility for their own country, if they are ever to become a successful democratic country. If they do not want to do that, the Shi'ite cleric was right: Democracy isn't the best system for them, but a fundy Islamic state (read: dictatorship) is. The more these people are shielded, the more the US does, the worse it'll be in the long run. If the Iraqis were to cooperate to rebuild their own country, they will have done it *together*, by themselves, which will give them a sense of pride and unity, essential for a free society.

KillerYoda · 05-09-2003, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dragonlich
Many Iraqis can only seem to whine and complain, while waiting for the US to solve all their problems (and leaving ASAP, of course).

You usually try to clean up the beer after you spill it.

But really, who hasn't had the urge to put some of the "yellow cake" on their clothes? My date to prom had a dress practically made of it.

guthmund · 05-10-2003, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KillerYoda
You usually try to clean up the beer after you spill it.

But really, who hasn't had the urge to put some of the "yellow cake" on their clothes? My date to prom had a dress practically made of it.

I have that urge all the time.

Look on the bright side, at least they aren't eating it.....at least not yet.....

05-07-2003, 08:54 AM	#9 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	FOLKS Please make your points without slipping into personal vindictive. Thanks __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

05-06-2003, 09:59 PM	#2 (permalink)
maximusveritas Winner	the last few paragraphs disgusted me. how could we let this happen? I hope this isn't true.

05-06-2003, 10:12 PM	#3 (permalink)
Easytiger Insane Location: Tigerland	Human nature dictates that we take responsibility as late as possible and get rid of it as early as possible.

05-07-2003, 12:00 AM	#4 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	Well... being totally cynical: the Iraqis looted the place, not the US. Seriously, if the Iraqis don't understand a "danger" sign in their own language, combined with some nasty skulls and radiation signs... why should I care? One would assume they'd be more intelligent than this. I could ask "When, exactly, do the Iraqis start acting rationally?", or even "When, exactly, do the Iraqis start accepting responibility for their own country?" But I guess it's easier to blame the Americans for not being everywhere at once...

05-07-2003, 07:50 AM	#6 (permalink)
maximusveritas Winner	They were very quick to secure the oil fields, but not a nuclear facility? Don't give me that BS about the Iraqis taking responsibility. Under the Geneva Convention, the US, as the occupying power, has an obligation to ensure the safety of the civilian population. I'm still not convinced all of the allegations made in the article are true, but if they are, the US surely bears some of the responsibility.

05-07-2003, 10:46 AM	#10 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	The US forces are doing something. They're in fact doing a lot. You just don't hear about it, because it's not news if all is going okay. You hear about incidents like this, not about the nuclear plants that were not looted when US troops protected it. I think an occupying force should take responsibility for the safety of the population as soon as the fighting stops in that area. However, I wonder against what they have to protect the people? I don't think you can expect the US forces to protect the Iraqis from their own stupidity... At what point do the Iraqis take responsibility to protect themselves? And at what point are the US forces allowed to stop protecting? After all, if it goes all the way, the US would be responsible for Iraqi kids cutting themselves while playing, for example... unrealistic (and a stupid example, of course). Oh, and Smooth... if the TFP hadn't crashed, you might have read my rant about how I don't give a rat's arse about both the Iraqis and the US soldiers; I'm Dutch, after all, and both countries are far away. I care about my friends and family, not about some idiot in Iraq that thinks he can ignore warnings about nuclear waste... Let me ask you this: would YOU use containers with nuclear waste to store water??? No, of course you wouldn't! That is personal responsibility, something the Iraqis should try for a change.

05-07-2003, 10:06 PM	#14 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	Whatever, the excuses really are getting old...and a definate pattern is emerging. US troops 'encouraged' Iraqi looters http://tfproject.org/tfp/showthread....&threadid=5538

05-07-2003, 11:35 PM	#15 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	...as are the comments of the armchair generals/policemen, who think that every reported incident is true, and proof of a wider picture, and who know exactly what the US should have done... At the same time, they jump on every report dismissing their side of the argument, claiming it's propaganda or just plain lies. (Yes, this goes both ways.) I suggest we all wait a few months to learn the truth about some stories we're all getting worked up about. The museum looting is already being played down, and I suspect other stories will be too.

05-07-2003, 11:44 PM	#16 (permalink)
boatin Psycho	Imagine an American in Britain crossing the street. Traffic runs the opposite way, and Americans get killed every year stepping off the curb. Does a local have any responsibility to stop that person if they can? Or should they just say "it’s a grown person, he can read a sign, and it’s evolution in action..."?? Does a person have any moral responsibility to stop someone from hurting themselves? What is so freaking hard about accepting some responsibility? And more relevantly for TFP, can’t anyone on the other ‘side’ acknowledge this point? No one is going to take your birthday away if you say “yep, more planning would have been good. They really screwed this part up”. The administration sold war to the American people, spent billions of dollars, removed Saddam (a good thing), and we claim to be helping the people beyond removing Saddam. And we couldn't ask "what things are at risk as the war winds down?" That's ludicrous. A project manager with a mediocre budget could have identified a hundred ways to fix the impending problems and have a beneficial impact on the country and the people. And no, I’m not naïve enough to think that it’s easy. It’s just that it doesn’t seem to have received any effort at all. This is, of course, brought to you by the people who brought you "gulf war (I) syndrome" and budget cuts to Veteran Affairs. Of course they don't care about the 30,000 troops. But lip service is all that matters, right? Oh, yeah, and being right. I apologize for the rant, but this is disgraceful.

05-08-2003, 12:58 AM	#17 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	Boatin... you assume there was no planning, and I think you're wrong. No, I know you're wrong. The US forces are doing a great job, but if you just focus on the things that go wrong, it's obvious you're going to feel they've done a bad job. Have you heard anything about mass lootings in Iraq in the past week, or the week before? As far as I can tell, it's died down quite a bit. The other day, news reports said about 50 pro-saddam guys stormed a local government office in some village in Iraq.... The local police stepped in, and the people dispersed. That's good news, isn't it? In the case of the moral responsibility to stop someone hurting themselves: is that a demand, or a preference? How do you stop people from doing stupid things in Iraq, when it's obvious you can't stop people from that in the US itself? Now, think about this: before the war, Saddam released most of the country's criminals, as a gesture of good will to his people. With all those common criminals running around, wouldn't it be normal that crime goes up when the war ends? You cannot expect the US forces to solve that problem overnight, especially with many police records burned during the looting...

05-08-2003, 11:31 AM	#19 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	That's a straw man you're burning there Sixate -- no response necessary. Dragonlich, if we wait long enough I'm quite sure my government's administration will be able to downplay every negative aspect of the war. Anyway, I'm not an armchair general and I haven't "jumped" on every report. Step back and look at the broader picture yourself and a definate trend emerges--once again (as I suspect you didn't catch it the first time), my "issue" is more with your attitude than the actions. I understand the actions were unforseen, now why the antagonism towards the Iraqi people (the people we are supposed to be helping, btw)? Just look above at all the filth and hatred that spilled out of Sixate's computer (nothing's good enough for smooth, smooth equates the US government with Saddam, the Iraqi people are so dumb who can possibly know what they'll do next...). These are the people who claimed altruistic motives a few weeks ago.

05-08-2003, 12:07 PM	#20 (permalink)
drewg Crazy Location: Norway	Accusing the Iraqi people of being stupid, because Iraqi criminals go around looting in the absence of police, is not right. Criminals are criminals, and when there's noone to enforce the law, criminals can do as they want to. And comparing the "liberation" of Iraq to the liberation of countries like France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Norway after WW2 is not correct either. Back in 1945 we were liberated from an occupying foreign power (who when they invaded actually claimed they were liberators who came to protect us from France and England). Iraq is being "liberated" from their own government, so you can't really expect the same reaction (and also, Iraqi people does not have the same sense of unity, that for example the dutch and the norwegians have) . And before their is a real democratic Iraqi government in place in Iraq, and the coalition forces have pulled out, the US and Britain are still occupying forces. Now, I don't expect that the coalition can handle all cases of looting, and I know they're trying to put an end to the looting gangs and restore law and order. But they're are also oblidged to do this as an occypying power, and if they don't get the job done properly, people should voice their consern. I don't think we really should panic and start to point out the blame yet, since it's not so long ago since the end of the Baath party. But if the coalition failes to restore law and order and create an Iraqi democracy after a longer period of time, they will not have kept what they promised and what they are obliged to do, and should be held responsible for that. I think we should wait a while and see how it goes for a few months, so we'll have a clearer view of what the situation is like under the new American/British occupation.