Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Open Discussions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-01-2003, 04:58 PM   #576
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Unhappy A grim task

Several x's a day, I check the latest casualty tally, and I update the figures on my signature.

It saddens me to see that figure change frequently, sometimes several times in one hour.
 
Old 04-01-2003, 05:12 PM   #577
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Erik Haselhofer (Erik) wrote:
You have to understand that Neil only reads one side of the news and then proceeds to accuse the rest of us of being uninformed.
Rude, sarcastic, and patently untrue.
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
With respect:



My sources are the Independent, the BBC (I'm practically GLUED to the latest BBC updates, even tho I think they treat it as a weather-broadcast...very surreal), the NY Times, all my local papers, and yes: the indymedia sites, electroniciraq, and Pacifica radio broadcasts.

Regarding my postings of the casualty rates: those are from www.iraqbodycount.org .

Check out their sources: all mainstream, well-documented, carefully tabulated.

When I call into account your sources, all I am asking is for you to broaden your news input. Go ahead: stick to your guns. Believe what you want; I'm just asking you to use other outlets besides Fox, and CNN: both of which are using a very narrow source.

I am not interested in any other form of discourse, except one arising from mutually-held respect.
Any questions? Or: shall you continue with the same tactic of "sarcastic slander first, reflect later...?"
 
Old 04-01-2003, 05:36 PM   #578
opherdonchin
Dojo: Baltimore Aikido
Location: Baltimore
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 586
Offline
Ok, since I've had some success with this, I'm going to post another editorial I sort of found interesting. I want to add two caveats, though. 1) I don't read necessarilly follow everyone elses links; 2) the fact that I've posted two sort of right leaning articles in a row should not be taken as support for the war (or, as opposition to the war, for that matter).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Mar28.html

Yours in Aiki
Opher
 
Old 04-01-2003, 06:12 PM   #579
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
Sigh.

The Russian link provides an analysis of the military situation completely lacking in US media...

Sure, look askance at the credibility of the source. But please, I suggest you hold off shooting the messenger, before you at least look at what he has to say.
Neil, I wrote my comment after I read the article and researched where it came from. I've been reading several russian forums, so I've been exposed to quite a few such sites, and believe me, those are the last places you want to go searching for credible perspective.

So it was basically just a friendly advice - presenting sources from a country known for its anti-american stance in the context of this war probably does a disservice to your argument, that's all.

Daniel
 
Old 04-01-2003, 06:22 PM   #580
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
So it was basically just a friendly advice - presenting sources from a country known for its anti-american stance in the context of this war probably does a disservice to your argument, that's all.
OK. Do you have any suggestions for another site (other than that 1) that looks at offers military appraisals of Iraq...outside the US?

I look at a lot of humanitarian sites (NGO's, mostly), and they are all pretty worried. Of course, none of them offer military analysis, and the reporters around Baghdad and Iraq are taking disturbing turns. A reporter was just kicked out of Iraq, by the US troops, and an indy reporter was kicked out of Baghdad. He had a tough time, getting back home.
 
Old 04-01-2003, 06:54 PM   #581
DanielR
Location: New York
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 164
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
OK. Do you have any suggestions for another site (other than that 1) that looks at offers military appraisals of Iraq...outside the US?
I'll let you know if I come across one. Personally, I find articles of Ze'ev Schiff in the Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" to be concise and to the point. Here's a sample

Daniel
 
Old 04-01-2003, 07:21 PM   #582
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Yes, I've read a few articles from Haaretz. They were good.

I should pay more attention to what they say, nowadays. I'm sure they'll offer an insightful balance. Thanks for the tip.
 
Old 04-01-2003, 10:03 PM   #583
Erik
Location: Bay Area
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,200
Offline
Quote:
Neil Mick wrote:
patently untrue.
Which correctly identifies many of your statements of fact. The only reason I'm still here is that you continue to make poorly supported claims. As long as you do, my 5th final and complete declaration of doneness ain't done. Six more and I catch up to Saddam.

Hundreds of Kurds have been killed and 900,000 made homeless in a new round of repression in northern Iraq.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9909/14/iraq.report/

Today just 6 percent to 17 percent of the marshes, one of the world's most important wetlands, is intact, and more than 200,000 people have been driven out of the area in this act of vengeance by the Iraqi dictator. The marshes may disappear altogether by 2010.

http://www.kuwait-info.org/News/iraq_draining_away.html

By the way, there is fodder for your anti-US sentiments here.
 
Old 04-01-2003, 10:09 PM   #584
Pasha
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 8
Offline
Quote:
Daniel Rozenbaum (DanielR) wrote:
those are the last places you want to go searching for credible perspective.
Well, the article was a reprint from www.iraqwar.ru which is rather informative and moderate than some of the periodicals. I would take Daniel's advice with a grain of salt though. For the best selection of Russian editorials and analitics I would suggest David Johnson's newsletter (CDI project) - davidjohnson@erols.com.

The overwhelming mood in Russian media was best summarized by Alexei Pankin, editor of the Sreda media journal: "Everybody wants this war to be over quickly, and it is clear that America will win but everybody wants America to be dealt as many blows in the face as possible. There is a feeling of surprising satisfaction with the fact that the U.S.

military machine hasn't turned out to be as mighty as advertised." So I would be careful when reading regular newspaper sites. iraqwar.ru however, does offer somewhat sobering analysis in my view.

I appologize in advance for the lengthy qoute, but I am simply not sure where to find this since it came this afternoon

Analysis: Russia advises Iraq on U.S. plan

By Martin Sieff

UPI Senior News Analyst

WASHINGTON, April 1 (UPI) -- Russian military advisers have told Iraqi

President Saddam Hussein and his government that the main Allied drive on

Baghdad will not take place until mid-April and will then come around the

west of the city, Russian journalists and analysts with strong links to

Russian military intelligence now claim.

Strikingly, the Russian analysts, whose work appears on the iraqwar.ru Web

site, believe that U.S. and Allied forces are still overwhelmingly likely

to win the war and that they are performing in a highly impressive manner.

The reports are described as "based on the Russian military intelligence --

the Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU -- reports."

A March 31 report on the site revealed that Iraq was receiving analytical

advice from Russian officials. "Russian military analysts are advising the

Iraqi military command against excessive optimism," it said.

The Russian analysts stated that "There is no question that the U.S.

'blitzkrieg' failed to take control of Iraq and to destroy its army. It is

clear that the Americans got bogged down in Iraq and that the military

campaign hit a snag."

But they then went on to caution the Iraqis, "The Iraq command is now in

danger of underestimating the enemy. For there is no reason to question the

resolve of the Americans and their determination to reach the set goal --

complete occupation of Iraq."

And they continued, "Despite some obvious miscalculations and errors of the

coalition's high command, the (Allied) troops that have entered Iraq

maintain high combat readiness and are willing to fight. The initiative in

the war remains firmly in the hands of the coalition."

Indeed, in a March 30 report the Russian analysts predicted, "The coalition

is already planning a new large scale operation that will utilize the new

forces currently being deployed in the region."

Russian intelligence believed "this large scale operation will be launched

from the general vicinity of Karabela and will develop into a wide maneuver

around Baghdad from the west ending in the area of the Tartar lake east of

al-Hadid -- or east of the Tartar lake at Samarrah," the Russian analysts'

report said. "From this point a part of the force will continue advancing

toward Saddam Hussein's home town of Tikrit and from there it will turn

towards Baghdad from the north through Samarrah and Baahkuba; meanwhile the

rest of the force will strike the rears of the Iraqi forces fighting in the

north near Kirkuk and Mosul."

"Such an operation would require up to 60,000 troops, no less than 300

tanks and 200 helicopters," the Russian analysts concluded. "It is believed

that such forces can be put together by April 15 and by April 18 they

should be ready for to attack."

It remains to be seen, of course if the war will indeed follow this highly

detailed prediction. Current reports indicate that U.S. forces are slowly

closing in on Baghdad and probing for weaknesses in Iraqi defenses already.

What is certainly the case is that Iraqi resistance has been impressive and

prolonged and that contrary to universally held U.S. media assumptions --

and the confident expectations of Defense Department war planners -- the

Iraqis have succeeded in holding up and preventing U.S. conquest and

occupation of all major cities to this point, almost two weeks into the

war. The main -- and bloodiest -- clashes of the war are clearly still ahead.

With this in mind one other, sobering conclusion of the GRU analysts may

prove significant. The March 30 report concluded, "Russian military

analysts believe that the critical (point) for the U.S. duration of the war

would be over 90 days" -- in other words, after mid-June -- "provided that

during that time the coalition will sustain over 1,000 killed. Under such

circumstances a serious political crisis in the U.S. and the world will be

unavoidable."

As for what the fears are - this might be interesting

Cheers.
 
Old 04-01-2003, 11:13 PM   #585
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Erik:

Mass murderers, indicting Hussein???

That IS a good one: perhaps they'll be so good, as to supply the judges...?

And, if your "only reason for being here is to combat my poor suppositions," you've come up with a poor counter, indeed.

60% invective, 15% repetition of 1/2 truths, and 25% regurgitated CNN (read: White House press staff) reports doth not a solid counter, make.

But, let the readers decide: you've certainly failed to convince me.

But, I sure notice all the talk of humanitarian aid, and all the US support for the upcoming humanitarian crisis, that we're creating, on CNN.

Gosh, we ARE such a HUMANITARIAN nation, aren't we...? All that lovely food we hand out, off trucks...be nice, now: let the little girl get some, too>>>looks good for the camera's...
 
Old 04-02-2003, 12:00 AM   #586
Erik
Location: Bay Area
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,200
Offline
#&$*&#*^@ 15 minute time limit.

Last night I had a two-hour conversation with someone opposed to the war. It was quite civil and we had a lot of common ground. There are issues worth discussing where I agree with those opposed to the war and many where I disagree.

So much of this debate has fallen into extremes like:

1) The USA is intentionally committing genocide with the sanctions.

2) Saddam was part of 9/11.

3) The US is only there to take the oil.

4) Saddam has direct ties with Al Qaeda.

Really, none of these are true in the aggregate, although all have some tiny bit of truth to them. For instance,

1) Sanctions do suck, but one document is not proof of US genocide except to someone desperate to see it that way and completely ignore Saddam's complicity and the reasons for sanctions in the first place.

2) Saddam wasn't part of 9/11 but I bet he did a dance in whatever palace he was in.

3) Any US president that didn't think about oil should be impeached, however, if you look at how the US buys oil and how the oil market works you get a much different picture.

4) The terrorist camp in Northern Iraq, is, well, it's in Iraq. Still, I doubt that Saddam is a big fan of them.

Am I sarcastic? HELL YES! These are stupid and simplistic arguments as are many of their friends just like them.

For some reason this issue has polarized the argument to the realm of 'wild-assed' claims, in the extreme. I blame part of that on Bush's extreme lack of sales skill but I also blame much of it on people desperate to paint the USA as the worst entity the world has ever seen. The truth on all of this is that no one is clean in this debate. Not Germany, not France, not Russia, not China, not the United States, not the UN, not the Arab world, not Bush, not the anti-war crowd, nor the pro-war crowd.

I do agree that this situation sucks. I think going to war in the Arab world is the best of a host of bad options in a crappy situation i wish we were not in. Thing is, all anyone seems able to do is hurl nonsense at each other, never address the real issues, and certainly not provide any solid solutions.

Looks like there's a lot to be sarcastic about on this one.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 12:51 AM   #587
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
You want to address the real issues?

Look at the numbers here, at the bottom of my post: that's as real as it gets.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 01:07 AM   #588
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Jaime McGrath wrote:
".

Well lets argue facts. As one who worked for Military and D.O.D organizations involved with OT&E (Operational Test and Evaluation), (Ballistic Missile Defense), AND yes BDA (Battle Damage Assesment). I can say from my personal assesment (not affiliated with any government position) this picture does indeed show launches (not simply false launches resulting from initial blasts from U.S. strikes) from the ground into the air and back down onto the city. From the trajectory analysis that can be detrmined from this photograph it can be seen from the output of the rocket it is probable that these are misfires due to aging equipment or other malfunction. The clearing or "greying" and dissapation of the smoke would indicate that these rockets were fired prior (perhaps seconds) to the U.S. strikes hitting target.

I think it may be time to check that body count and its true source (It is the same the Iraqi Government are using)....
But, I guess being an expert doesn't mean being omnipotent...

The proof: marketplace deaths were caused by a US missile

By Cahal Milmo

02 April 2003

An American missile, identified from the remains of its serial number, was pinpointed yesterday as the cause of the explosion at a Baghdad market on Friday night that killed at least 62 Iraqis.

The codes on the foot-long shrapnel shard, seen by the Independent correspondent Robert Fisk at the scene of the bombing in the Shu'ale district, came from a weapon manufactured in Texas by Ray- theon, the world's biggest producer of "smart" armaments.

The identification of the missile as American is an embarrassing blow to Washington and London as they try to match their promises of minimal civilian casualties with the reality of precision bombing.

Both governments have suggested the Shu'ale bombing and the explosion at another Baghdad market that killed at least 14 people last Wednesday were caused by ageing Iraqi anti-aircraft missiles. Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, said yesterday it was "increasingly probable" the first explosion was down to the Iraqis and Peter Hain, the Welsh Secretary, suggested on BBC's Newsnight last night that President Saddam sacked his head of air defences because they were not working properly.

But investigations by The Independent show that the missile thought to be either a Harm (High Speed Anti-Radiation Missile) device, or a Paveway laser-guided bomb was sold by Raytheon to the procurement arm of the US Navy. The American military has confirmed that a navy EA-6B "Prowler" jet, based on the USS Kittyhawk, was in action over the Iraqi capital on Friday and fired at least one Harm missile to protect two American fighters from a surface-to-air missile battery.

The Pentagon and Raytheon, which last year had sales of $16.8bn (10.6bn), declined to comment on the serial number evidence last night. A US Defence Department spokeswoman said: "Our investigations are continuing. We cannot comment on serial numbers which may or may not have been found at the scene."

An official Washington source went further, claiming that the shrapnel could have been planted at the scene by the Iraqi regime.

On Saturday, Downing Street disclosed intelligence that linked the Wednesday attack and by implication Friday's killings on Iraqi missiles being fired without radar guidance and falling back to earth. The Prime Minister's spokesman said: "A large number of surface-to-air missiles have been malfunctioning and many have failed to hit their targets and have fallen back on to Baghdad. We are not saying definitively that these explosions were caused by Iraqi missiles but people should approach this with due scepticism."

The Anglo-American claims were undermined by the series of 25 digits and letters on the piece of fuselage shown to Mr Fisk by an elderly resident of Shu'ale who lived 100 yards from the site of the 6ft crater made by the explosion.

The numbers on the fragment retrieved from the scene and not shown to the Iraqi authorities read: "30003-704ASB7492". The letter "B" was partially obscured by scratches and may be an "H". It was followed by a second code: "MFR 96214 09."

An online database of suppliers maintained by the Defence Logistics Information Service, part of the Department of Defence, showed that the reference MFR 96214 was the identification or "cage" number of a Raytheon plant in the city of McKinney, Texas.

The 30003 reference refers to the Naval Air Systems Command, the procurement agency responsible for furnishing the US Navy's air force with its weaponry.

The Pentagon refused to disclose which weapon was designated by the remaining letters and numbers, although defence experts said the information could be found within seconds from the Nato database of all items of military hardware operated across the Alliance, "from a nuclear bomb to a bath plug", as one put it.

Raytheon, which also produces the Patriot anti-missile system and the Tomahawk cruise missile, lists its Harms and its latest Paveway III laser-guided bombs, marketed with the slogan "One bomb, one target", as among its most accurate weaponry.

The company's sales description for its anti-radar missile says: "Harm was designed with performance and quality in mind. In actual field usage, Harm now demonstrates reliability four times better than specification. No modern weapons arsenal is complete without Harm in its inventory."

Faced with apparent proof that one of its missiles had been less accurate than specification, Raytheon was more coy on the capabilities of its products. A spokeswoman at the company's headquarters in Tucson, Arizona, said: "All questions relating to the use of our products in the field are to be handled by the appropriate military authority."

Defence experts said the damage caused at Shu'ale was consistent with that of Paveway or, more probably, a Harm weapon, which carries a warhead designed to explode into thousands of aluminium fragments and has a range of 80km.

Despite its manufacturer's claims, it also has a record of unreliability when fired at a target which "disappears" if, as the Iraqi forces do, the target's operators switch their radar signal rapidly on and off. Nick Cook, of Jane's Defence Weekly, said: "The problem with Harms is that they can be seduced away from their targets by any sort of curious transmission. They are meant to have corrected that but there have been problems." During the Kosovo conflict four years ago, a farmer and his daughter were badly injured when a missile exploded in their village. A shard of the casing was found near by with a reference very similar to that found in Baghdad: "30003 704AS4829 MFP 96214."

The American navy confirmed that one of its Prowler jets, which is used to jam enemy radar, had been over an unspecified area of Baghdad on Friday night. A pool reporter on the carrier USS Kittyhawk was told that the Prowler squadron had fired its first Harm on Friday evening in response to an air-defence unit that was threatening two F/A-18 Hornet jets. Lieutenant Rob Fluck told the journalist that the crew had not seen where their missile had landed.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 02:23 AM   #589
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
"The operation of Iraq sanctions involves numerous agencies within the United Nations. The Security Council's 661 Committee* is generally responsible for both enforcing the sanctions and granting humanitarian exemptions. The Office of Iraq Programme (OIP), within the U.N. Secretariat, operates the Oil for Food Programme. Humanitarian agencies such as UNICEF and the World Health Organization work in Iraq to monitor and improve the population's welfare, periodically reporting their findings to the 661 Committee. These agencies have been careful not to publicly discuss their ongoing frustration with the manner in which the program is operated.

Over the last three years, through research and interviews with diplomats, U.N. staff, scholars, and journalists, I have acquired many of the key confidential U.N. documents concerning the administration of Iraq sanctions. I obtained these documents on the condition that my sources remain anonymous. What they show is that the United States has fought aggressively throughout the last decade to purposefully minimize the humanitarian goods that enter the country."

http://www.harpers.org/online/cool_w..._war.php3?pg=1
 
Old 04-03-2003, 03:59 AM   #590
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Interesting analyses of the war-situation:

Medieval Sieges and the Politics of Casualties; Which Side Will Give Up First?

And, for balance (wouldn't want to accused of being "biased!" lol)

A US Military-strategic think-tank's website

(pages take forEVER to load. Haven't been able to see it yet,,,it 's STILL loading!)

www.stratfor.com
 
Old 04-03-2003, 04:14 AM   #591
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
But, what the heck, Erik: I've got a killer insomnia, and so here I am, face glued to the comp screen, and I's 3AM. So, here's my 2 cents:

1. That the US imposed Sanctions on Iraq for 12 years without knowing the effects upon the Iraqi children is not just impossible, it is ignoring reality. Studies by the UN came out; MANY studies. The US gov't DID know about the effects, even as they implelented them.

Again, give "Cool War" another look.

2. I don't care if Saddam got piss-drunk and slaughtered a town in honor of 9/11; attacking Iraq as some form of "justice" for 9/11 is patently insane. He had nothing to do with it...might as well slaughter all the dolphins in memory of 9/11, or, FTM, Americans.

3. An interesting point. Yes, how the US deals with the oil market IS critical to this issue. But we have less than 200 years before the direction of the oil-flow slows to a trickle. In 20 years, we're going to reach the halfway point.

If I ever heard of a time in history more ripe for a change to alternative fuels, this is it. All that vaunted, centralized power...this guy could really change things for the better, instead of becoming the new "Butcher of Iraq," while canonizing the old.

4. Yeah, we're in agreement, there. A terrorist camp right under the watchful eyes of the no-fly zone....

But, we are in partial agreement over the lack of sales pitch to the Arab-world, on Bush's part. If he had even HALF an interest in REAL regime-change, he'd a least have hired a PR firm.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 12:57 PM   #592
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Oh, so Mr. "I'm really going, now" just couldn't keep to his word...?

Not interested in your comments, Jaime (since, you can't be bothered to respond in polite debate, via email).

Gotta love this ignore feature...bye!
 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:13 PM   #593
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Neil,

I am sure we as a country (U.S) certainly knew the effects on the Iraqi children.

I am sad that they are the ones to suffer. It hurts me deeply.

But at what point does Iraq become responsible for it's own actions?

Was it the U.S. that caused the suffering? or was it Iraq's refusal to obey?

 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:15 PM   #594
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Neil,

In response to the casualties you quote above:

How many Iraqi's have been killed, tortured, or maimed by Sadam Hussein?

Not that we should ever justify a body count based on strictly a cost/benefit ratio of human lives....but it does need to be considered!

 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:33 PM   #595
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
Neil,

I am sure we as a country (U.S) certainly knew the effects on the Iraqi children.

I am sad that they are the ones to suffer. It hurts me deeply.

But at what point does Iraq become responsible for it's own actions?

Was it the U.S. that caused the suffering? or was it Iraq's refusal to obey?
Excellent. Now we get the real question, that needs to be asked.

That the US knowingly attacked the water and agricultural infrastructure is, IMO, without doubt. This act is a complete violation of the Geneva Convention of War, and it validates Hussein's attempts to waffle around the inspections.

Consider: no confession signed under torture or duress has merit. By the same token, an international law enforced with genocidal Sanctions becomes invalid. if not in legal framework (as I honestly am not sure), but in the mind of the Arabic world.

Hussein's supporters could say that he was fighting an unjust violation of the Conventions by subterfuge; it gives a moral basis for his actions, where there would be none.

I have always been very opposed to the treatment and non-POW status of the Afghani prisoners at Guantanamo. In wrongly imprisoning them and denying them council, WE become the opporessors, the terrorists.

When we illegally invaded Iraq, we only underscored this discrepancy. Now, we're calling Iraqi's defending their own country from invaders "terrorists."

A disturbing picture begins to emerge. Go to the Defence Dept website: see if their own standards of combatants and definition of terrorists match up to their behavior, if the mirror is turned in the other direction.

The picture that emerges is one of Anglo-American racism: the Arab combatants are subject to one standard, and the US soldiers another (another example: the ICC. We are quite happy to see an int'l court that investigates OTHER countries' militaries, but we want our own militia to be exempt, from the same scrutiny).

So now we knowingly used the Sanctions with genocidal effect; we disrupted the inspections process that was reporting tangible results; and we're now attacking a city that the Arabs STILL remember the Mongol attack of Baghdad, in 1270.

In short, we're going into this conflict without a legal leg to stand on, with one eye closed, with the probable aim of canonizin Hussein and enriching the ranks of Al Qaeda, bombing a major civilian city with the expressed intention of "saving" them.

If this looks patently absurd to me, how do you think it looks to the average Iraqi, or Iranian (particularly since the Iranians are now being threatened)?

Sure, Hussein must answer for his crimes, but invasion is the worst idea, out of many.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:36 PM   #596
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
Neil,

In response to the casualties you quote above:

How many Iraqi's have been killed, tortured, or maimed by Sadam Hussein?

Not that we should ever justify a body count based on strictly a cost/benefit ratio of human lives....but it does need to be considered!
Absolutely. But, it needs to be considered in context.

How many of our allies are guilty of human rights violations? Why are their crimes utterly ignored, while Baghdad gets cluster bombs?
 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:45 PM   #597
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
But, I'll tell you something very telling, Kevin. You're the first person to comment upon how sad it is that these Iraqi casualties occurred, how bombing a children's hospital is a great loss.

Most of the other ppl in opposition to me only called into question the validity of these #'s. Not one word of loss, of sorrow, only "every civilian death is on the hands of Hussein" to paraphrase Erik.

When I hear of these deaths, I feel it as if it occurred in New York, in this country.

If your first response is to deny the reality of these deaths, well then: that says it all , doesn't it?

Denial of reality, affects several levels of perception.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:45 PM   #598
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
I would certainly agree with you that human rights violations by so called civilized nations are unacceptable and should not be tolerated.

I think though that you and I may disagree in a gray area between lawful actions of war vs. human rights issues.

It would be interesting to see where we would meet in these issues.

I certainly oppose "dumb" land mines especially when there is new technology that allows them to be employed in an effective manner for force protection that does not have the undesired after effects we see in a post war environment.

Cluster bombs have their time and place on the battlefield.

I am very pleased with the fact that we are using ground troops to better control civilian casualties than trying to keep our hands clean from 30,000 feet. All though it will mean more lives lost for us....but I think America needs to wake up to the fact that their is a cost to war, not only in a deficit, but in human lives...both the enemies and ours!

 
Old 04-03-2003, 06:53 PM   #599
Neil Mick
Dojo: Aikido of Santa Cruz
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 225
Offline
Well, for me, it's all about human rights.

If human rights are not the primary concern, barbarism is legitimized.

Take a look at this article, to see my point.
 
Old 04-03-2003, 07:04 PM   #600
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Not sure I see YOUR point?

I actually am somewhat of an expert in Urban warefare and guerrilla warfare, having taught, studied, and trained in the tactics that we are employing and will soon be employing in Bhagdad.

Nothing wrong with bulldozers IMHO....it is when you use them indiscriminately against civilians as with any weapon system.

I think the article brings up some good points with good advice.

 

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are you knew there Aikido in IRAQ? Wissam J. Faraj General 5 02-14-2006 06:45 AM
Iraq Aikido makuchg General 21 11-06-2005 04:36 AM
Help for soldier in Iraq?? ServinginIraq General 12 11-23-2004 10:10 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:28 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2020 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2020 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate