On Wednesday 16 Apr 2003 6:24 am, you wrote:
> >American soldiers fire on political rally, killing at
> >least 10 civilians
> >By Patrick Cockburn in northern Iraq
> >http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=397631
> >
> >16 April 2003
> >
> >American soldiers killed at least 10 Iraqis and wounded
> >dozens of others yesterday when they reportedly fired on a
> >political rally in Mosul. "There are perhaps 100 wounded
> >and 10 or 12 dead," said Ayad al-Ramadhani, director of
> >the Republican Hospital in Mosul.
American soldiers stand by and do nothing while looters loot: they're
accomplices, they meant for it to happen, they're softening the place up for
global corporate takeover ('cos privatisation is theft, man - yeah!).
American soldiers use the only kind of force they've been trained to use to
regain control of a situation they've allowed to slip out of control: they're
murderers who napalm maternity wards for sport, they just don't care who they
kill.
When American soldiers finally pack up and go home, they'll be accused of
leaving the country in the lurch and failing to fulfil their duties as an
occupying force.
All of this speaks in reality for the need for a peacekeeping force with the
right priorities and the right experience to be brought in, so the US
soldiers can go home and have their post-traumatic stress breakdowns in peace
while Gabe sits and writes poems calling them babykillers. But let's not say
anything constructive here, shall we?
I don't feel particularly joyous about having approved of the destruction of
Iraq's ruling rape gang; it was, and remains, the proverbial "dirty job" (and
I retain the conviction that in dealing with the likes of Saddam and sons
clean hands means no hands). But so: I feel more guilty right now about
having hedged my bets than I do about having willed the means to this
particular end.
Dominic
|