Buy Female Cialis Without Prescription
Old Stories of the war February 13th, 2008
This post was written one year ago by a friend of mine Buy female cialis without prescription, . I wanted to quote some of it here, cheap female cialis in uk, Female cialis without a prescription, but I found my self copying the whole post.
It was seventeen years ago, low cost female cialis, Cheap female cialis from uk, when an American pilot obeyed the order to burn a thousand people to death. The holocaust took place in Shelter No, purchase female cialis overnight delivery. Online female cialis, 25 in Baghdad, in Al-Amirya district, cheap female cialis from canada.
It was Wednesday February 13th, 1991 at 4:20am in Baghdad time, buy female cialis without prescription. Purchase female cialis online, A time that thousands of Iraqi people can not forget. The first bomb dug a small hole in the thick ceiling of the shelter, female cialis in malaysia. Buy female cialis once daily, And the 1000Kg steel door was automatically shut as it was programmed to protect the people inside from effects of bombs outside. But this time, buy female cialis online, Buy generic female cialis, it protected the world from witnessing the most brutal crime of all times.
The second 2000 pounds-bomb found its way through to the ground floor of the shelter where about 1000 people were sleeping.
According to witnesses I talked to, the shelter was full of women and children and very old people, female cialis online sale. Buy female cialis without prescription, They used to go there every night because the shelter had electricity and water and because they thought they would be protected from the rapid bombing of American airplanes daily. Buy female cialis low price, This time, they were not.
After the second bomb with the steel head penetrated the ceiling, female cialis in bangkok, Purchase female cialis no rx, it exploded inside the shelter. Everything was on fire, female cialis for order. Buy female cialis pills, And to be accurate, every one was on fire, order cheap female cialis online. Female cialis purchase, No one could help them because the shelter was designed to prevent anything and everyone from getting into the shelter once it was shut.
People kept burning until the morning and until the turned to ashes.
At that morning, the entire world woke up safely and joyfully, cheap female cialis no rx. A thousand people in Baghdad could not wake up, buy female cialis without prescription. Female cialis tablets, And few other thousands’ lives were never the same.
I’ll quote some of what the 6 survivors of this holocaust and few other witnesses said:
‘The sound of the explosion woke me up. I was looking around and all I saw was fire, certified female cialis. Find female cialis no prescription required, I tried to protect my face with my hands and my chest with my legs. I did not know what to do, order female cialis in canada. I thought that these are my last moment.’ A survivor said.
Buy female cialis without prescription, ‘I thought it was just a dream. Low price female cialis, I thought that I will wake up soon and all this was just a dream.’ Another survivor said.
‘They killed my 16 year old son. They killed my daughter on her fifteenth birthday, buy female cialis from canada. Compare female cialis prices online, I wish I was them. I wish I was with them.’ A mother of five kids whom were killed that day said.
‘I wish they died in a different way, buy cheap female cialis. I wish they did not feel the fire.’ Said a relative of a family who died that day.
‘I found her blanket, buy female cialis without prescription. Female cialis medicine, I even found her earrings. But I could not find her.’ Said a mother of a 12-year old girl who died that day.
A father of an infant who died that day said ‘My son was only 5 days old, female cialis pill. Cheap price female cialis, I don’t even remember his face. I don’t have a photo of him, female cialis online sales. I can’t even proof that he ever existed.’
Buy female cialis without prescription, Only 314 bodies were found complete that day. Female cialis buy, The rest of the bodies were turn to dust or torn into small burned pieces. The evacuation of bodies took three days.
The American administration claimed that there was a meeting for high ranked Iraqi military personnel there, find discount female cialis online. Female cialis sales, Although we saw non when we were evacuating the bodies, is this a good enough reason to take a thousand life ??
I lost five relatives in there, canadian pharmacy female cialis. Order female cialis without prescription, One of them was four moths old. We found him in his mother’s lap burnt to ashes, buy female cialis lowest price. Drug female cialis online purchase, We could only recognize them from the wedding ring in his mother’s hand.
This is the ugliest face of war no matter what achievements were made.
.
Similar posts: Buy black cialis without prescription. Buy cialis without prescription. Buy cialis jelly without prescription. Buy cialis professional without prescription. Buy cialis soft tabs without prescription. Buy cialis super active+ without prescription. Buy tramadol without prescription. Buy levitra without prescription. Buy levitra jelly without prescription. Buy soma without prescription.
Trackbacks from: Buy female cialis without prescription. Azathioprine online without prescription. Buy estrace vaginal cream without prescription. Alphagan without a prescription. Pyrantel pamoate without prescription. Buy neem without prescription. Levitra online without prescription. Buy alphagan without prescription. Buy lipothin without prescription. Adalat without a prescription.
February 16th, 2008 at 9:05 am
The world has already forgotten about it, my friend. Some don’t even know it happened. But we Iraqis will never ever forget such a horrible crime.
February 16th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Its our job to remind the people of this crime BT. Although we tend to forget many sorrowful events because of the more horrible things taking place now.
ننسى بما جد من أوجاعنا وجعاً
بالأمس من وطأة الآهات أبكانا
February 18th, 2008 at 2:14 am
Hey guys, I’m FedExing both of you a few boxes of really special, hard-to-find tissues. They not only absorb real tears, but also phony tears, ideological tears, polemical tears, and crocodile tears.
Enjoy.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 8:14 am
Jeffrey,
Your comment tells one of two things; either you are so uneducated regarding Iraq and what happened there, or you are just another American smartass who does not give a rat’s ass about how many people his government has killed and is killing.
And by the way,
I’ll FedEx you some ass-wipes, oh sorry, I forgot that YOU ARE AN ASS-WIPE.
February 18th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Jeffrey, I expected you to say that Saddam killed many more Iraqis, or that Saddam provided false intelligence to the US military, leading them to believe that some very important weapons were stored in that bunker (I have heard this theory from Iraqis). Why else would the US want to destroy a bunker like that?
You could have written something that actually pertains to the post, something to suggest that Saddam wanted the bad PR that resulted from this bombing. Instead you left an insensitive comment that makes Americans look bad, to say the least. You made fun of Iraqis remembering an event that should never be forgotten. Does it matter to the friends and relatives of the victims that it was an accident, the result of false intelligence? I don’t think so.
I also remember the bombing of the Amriya bunker very well. How could Iraqis forget? Jeffrey, I know that you and BT don’t like each other, but what do you have against BlogIraqi?
February 18th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Mojo,
I assumed, and I think correctly, that the only reason that both BT and BlogIraqi brought up the shelter bombing in 1991 — seventeen years ago — was because there are no other events that they can point to that will make the Americans look bad. And that’s why I offered them special tissues for their fake tears.
Everything you wrote about the Iraqi-on-Iraqi carnage conducted by Saddam’s regime, of course, is true. But guys like BT avoid the topic and the numbers involved with the mass graves throughout Iraq.
I’m not making fun of those who died. I’m making fun of BT and BlogIraqi, whose motives for mentioning that event NOW are pretty clear — at least to me.
We may have to agree to disagree on this issue.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
And by the way, look at this ridiculous title on BlogIraqi’s entry: The Iraqi Holocaust?!
Are you fricking kidding me? Holocaust?! It was one strike on a single structure — one out of hundreds if not thousands of strikes during the Gulf war. And it was a shelter that was to be used by high-ranking Ba’ath party members and military officers. It was a WAR. Tell me any military who does not want to take out the miltary leaders of their opponents.
If Americans had known that their were women and children in there, I’m sure it wouldn’t have been struck. One need only look at our targeting practices over the years in general and during Operation Iraqi Freedom back in 2003 in particular.
This is bullshit, Mojo. A single strike is now a holocaust? If that doesn’t tell you what kind of tears these guys are shedding, then nothing will.
I’m really sick of whining, deceitful bastards like these two.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
How about all the Kuwaitis who died during Iraq’s “unilateral invasion” on their country?
Guess what? From BT’s point of view, they weren’t even Kuwaitis.
BT writes:
Yes, Iraq invaded Kuwait because it was part of our land that was supposed to come back to us. I hate Saddam, but I and many Iraqis supported restoring our country’s land back.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Jeffery,
You make me sick.
First of all, you assumed wrong. I still remember this massacre because I used to live around there. And I still recall the smell of the burning flesh that remained in the area for a long long time. I went inside the shelter a year after it was shot, and the smell was still there. But your arrogant american ass could not believe that someone is sincere in his sorrow as long as it contradicts with the lovely white image of the mighty america.
“was because there are no other events that they can point to that will make the Americans look bad.”
that is hilarious, just hilarious. Believe me, you make the Americans look bad more than I do.
Mojo,
I tend to believe that bombing the shelter must have been based on wrong intelligence information. Because there is not other logical reason for spending so much money on the two hi-tech bombs used there.
February 18th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Yeah I think many people misuse the words “holocaust” and “genocide”. The only explanation I can think of is that the words are lost in translation.
February 18th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
BlogIraqi, I agree that the US did not intentionally kill innocent people. The bombing was condemned world wide. Do you think it’s possible that Saddam intentionally made it look like weapons or high ranking officials were staying in that bunker?
February 18th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Mojo,
I remember hearing people saying that Saddam and his high-ranked officials did few meetings in Shelters like this one in few places around Baghdad. I do not know how credible this information is. But I think this might be the reason behind the bombing.
Jeffery,
Mentioning Saddam’s crimes does not make this bombing right. It was a mistake and many people were burnt to death because of that mistake. And I am tired of you guy bitching around with Saddam’s crimes whenever someone points out a crime that the americans or their puppets in Baghdad do. When a crime happens and someone complains you guys jump out and say “what about what Saddam did”. Well, what the f*ck does that have to do with it?
Saddam being a criminal does not give anyone else the right to do more crimes. There is no relativity in crimes. The fact that Saddam killed a lot of people does not give the right to the Americans to kill people as long as the count is less than Saddam’s.
Personalizing the discussion here does you what you want Jeffery. It makes people leave the issue that the post is about and get into useless discussions about the writers.
Anyway,
If you are sick of me, take a hike kiddo. I would be more than pleased not to have you around here spreading your American arrogant fat-ass bullshit.
And one last thing, BT is a concerned patriotic Iraqi who loves his country and hates whoever hurts his country, starting from Saddam, and ending with the american sweetheart, george f*ckbag bush. And I do not expect you to say anything good about anyone disagreeing with the people signing your paycheck.
February 18th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
BlogIraqi,
I don’t care if I make you sick. Here are the facts. If we had wanted to eliminate all the Iraqis, we could have done that either with nuclear arms or by conventional means. We have the power to do that. Obviously, then, that wasn’t our intention back in the Gulf War or during Operation Iraqi Freedom (not Operation Iraqi Genocide, right?). If I recall correctly, hundreds of military sites were selected, targeted, and destroyed during the Gulf War. For the past five years, our troops have been trying to help Iraqis rebuild their country. American taxpayer money flows into Iraq (money that the US government takes from both Mojo’s and my paychecks each month).
I do consider the bombing of that shelter a tragedy. Innocent Iraqis were killed. But that was an isolated event, while the vast majority of the destroyed targets did not hurt Iraqi civilians. The same care was taken in the targeting of sites during Operation Iraqi Freedom. From all eyewitness accounts that I’ve read, it became obvious to Baghdadis that they were safe as long as they didn’t walk near government or military buildings. If you were in Baghdad then, do you agree or disagree with this?
Let’s discuss this. I think it’s a good topic.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
BlogIraqi,
Mentioning Saddam’s crimes does not make this bombing right. It was a mistake and many people were burnt to death because of that mistake. And I am tired of you guy bitching around with Saddam’s crimes whenever someone points out a crime that the americans or their puppets in Baghdad do.
You used two words here: “mistake” and “crime.” You are aware that there is a difference, right? As you admit, the bombing of the shelter was most likely a mistake. Normally a “crime” is when someone conducts an act that is planned before the event and with the intention to harm a particular person (we will forgo a discussion of the the differences between homocide and manslaughter). Again, the bombing of the shrine was not, then, a “crime.” A tragedy? Yes, obviously. The death of women and children in a war zone is always tragic. The other day either a couple “resistance” fighters or AQI members hung a three-year-old boy. That is a crime. It was their intention to kill the boy and by its very barbarity to send a message to other Iraqi citizens.
When a crime happens and someone complains you guys jump out and say “what about what Saddam did”. Well, what the f*ck does that have to do with it?
I think of this point you have a legitimate gripe. Even I have grown tired of the repetition of the litany of Saddam’s crimes against his own people. For guys like Mojo, however, who had relatives killed by Saddam’s regime, I’m sure that it’s still a personal issue.
Saddam being a criminal does not give anyone else the right to do more crimes. There is no relativity in crimes. The fact that Saddam killed a lot of people does not give the right to the Americans to kill people as long as the count is less than Saddam’s.
Americans have not killed a lot of Iraqi people. Just who is killing Iraqis? See my new blog entry to see who is really killing Iraqis these days:
Let’s Look at the Numbers, Okay?
Personalizing the discussion here does you what you want Jeffery. It makes people leave the issue that the post is about and get into useless discussions about the writers.
All issues are affected by various degrees of personal attachment and, at the same time, open to argument.
Anyway, If you are sick of me, take a hike kiddo.
I think I’ll stay.
I would be more than pleased not to have you around here spreading your American arrogant fat-ass bullshit.
Ask Mojo if I have a fat ass. Heh heh.
And one last thing, BT is a concerned patriotic Iraqi who loves his country and hates whoever hurts his country, starting from Saddam, and ending with the american sweetheart, george f*ckbag bush.
I agree that BT is an Iraqi patriot, which is why I’m looking forward to his return to his motherland. On the other point, look at my blog entry and ask yourself who is really killing Iraqis.
And I do not expect you to say anything good about anyone disagreeing with the people signing your paycheck.
What are you saying here? The US government pays me? Well, I teach at a private university. We’re not a socialist country, you know.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Jeffrey, I thought your original comment was over the top. I’m glad you clarified that you recognize it was a horrible tragedy and your beef was mostly personal. Not that I’m glad it’s personal, but at least you aren’t brushing this event off so lightly.
While I absolutely wouldn’t put it past Saddam to do any of the things Mojo said, the fact remains that hundreds of innocent Iraqis were killed in this strike, and Iraqis have a right to grieve and remember.
BlogIraqi: “When a crime happens and someone complains you guys jump out and say “what about what Saddam did”. Well, what the f*ck does that have to do with it?”
My own opinion is that much of the violence in Iraq after ‘03 was due to the former regime trying to hold onto or re-establish their grip using violence, intimidation, etc. just like they did in the good ol’ days. Yes, and criminals and Shia militias are responsible too. I just don’t think forgetting yesterday’s criminal regime is helpful against today’s criminal insurgents, who are the same people in many cases.
For example, Michael Totten wrote about visiting a former prison in Suleimaniya, Iraq where it’s claimed over ten thousand Iraqis were killed by torture, including young children and women. You want to forget about that, but remember the Al-Amirya shelter bombing? Why? Why not remember, and grieve for, both?
February 18th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
RhusLancia,
I still believe the motive behind posting about the bombing of that shrine, which BlogIraqi admits was a “mistake,” was to denigrate the US because there hasn’t been any activities done by Americans recently that they can point their fingers at and scream.
In short, BT and BlogIraqi were using the bombing of the shelter to both make a political point and to slander US forces — the “evil” Americans, whom BT calls both evil and stupid. THEY are the ones who are using those Iraqi deaths back in 1991 for their own personal agenda. It’s a rhetorical ploy, obvious to someone who deals with rhetorical issues on a daily basis and has learned to read closely for subtext.
I called them on it. By offering them tissues to wipe away their phony tears, I’m making a condensed argument with a clear image.
Why NOW suddenly after seventeen years? Why now when violence is dropping after almost five years of sacrifice by Iraqi police and military working alongside Coalition forces?
And who is really killing Iraqis? To follow BT and BlogIraqi, one might conclude it is the “evil” Americans, when the truth is just the opposite. Americans have died alongside Iraqi police and Iraqi military trying to reduce the violence in that country and bring stability.
Again, I think this debate might allow us to explore deeper issues.
*
February 18th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Yes, Jeffrey, and I assume stupid Americans keep whining about 9/11 attacks because they want to make Arabs/Muslims look bad. Why don’t you whining, deceitful bastards get over it already? 2,000 Americans died? Who the fuck cares? Your country is responsible for the deaths of millions around the globe, including hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans in response to 9/11, which was a drop in the bucket compared to the crimes Americans are reposnsible for. The rest of the world is sick of your whining too.
February 18th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Jeffrey: “I called them on it. By offering them tissues to wipe away their phony tears, I’m making a condensed argument with a clear image.”
Mebbe. But taking your first comment by itself, and without your later clarification, made it look like they shouldn’t remember or grieve about the incident. It invites BlogIraqi to link to your comment as an example of a heartless American, which is exactly what he did.
Me: “You want to forget about that, but remember the Al-Amirya shelter bombing?”
I probably should have worded that differently. You admit that Saddam was a criminal, but also want to not talk about the scope and scale of his crimes.
February 18th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Nifaq,
Yes, Jeffrey, and I assume stupid Americans keep whining about 9/11 attacks because they want to make Arabs/Muslims look bad.
I was teaching here in NYC on 9/11. I saw it all very up-close and personal. And yet I have NEVER written a single blog entry about 9/11 in almost four years of blogging. You can check the blog:
Iraqi Bloggers Central.
Muslim Kosovars have been cheering the Americans the last few days for helping them against the Serbs. Where were the Muslim “brothers” in that war?
*
February 18th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Jeffery,
If you get drunk and drive your car and run over somebody and kill him, is that a crime or a mistake?
The mistake of depending on the wrong intelligence information led to the crime of killing a huge number of people. Just like the mistake of getting drunk and driving led to the crime of killing someone.
If you are so affected by the money deducted from you paycheck to occupy Iraq, maybe you should have prevented the war from happening in the first place.
And again you are missing my point. The fact that Saddam is a criminal and has killed a huge number of people is not an excuse for other people to commit crimes. So, if we say that Saddam have killed 86,000 kurds during the Anfal operations, and Bin-Ladin killed 2,000 americans in 9/11, this makes Bin-Ladin’s crime a relatively-negligible-crime??
Rhus,
I am not neglecting that Saddam’s people are a big part of the cause of civilian deaths after 2003. But again this is irrelevant to Al-Amirya Shelter.
And what I can understand from Jeffery’s comments (all of them), is that he wants people not to look at the crimes done by the Americans because there were bigger ones done by Saddam. This is just unreasonable. I copied this blog entry from my friend’s blog because I felt connected to it as I was there and I have seen some of the bodies that were taken out from there. And I felt that I owe it to my neighbors whom have died there and to their families that I should remind the world about them.
If Jeffery feels that I am just whining, and bitching about something not so important, its basically his problem. I happen to find the death of these innocent people so important, and unforgettable.
I wonder how he would write about 9/11 after seventeen years since he was close there in NY.
Rhus, I recognize Saddam’s crimes and I wish that God gives him as much pain as he have caused to everyone. But this is simply not the subject of this post.
Jeffery again,
I think we all know the motive behind helping the dudes in Kosovo. It is simply because they are against Russia.
It reminds me of helping Bin-Ladin against the Russians in Afghanistan and how this turned out eventually.
February 18th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
BlogIraqi,
I’m happy we removed Saddam. In fact, I had voted for Gore in 2000 and told myself I would only vote for Bush IF he carried through on his promise to take out Saddam. He did, and I voted for him in 2004. I’m satisfied with my tax dollars at work.
*
*
February 18th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
BlogIraqi,
Only if the guys manning the military-control center where the selection of targets was taking place during the Gulf War were drunk on their arses would your argument make sense. I’ve never read any account that claims that the guys at the computer banks with connections to all the military assets at our disposal were drinking on the job.
Do you think Saddam was worrying if any Israeli non-military citizens — whether Jewish or Arab — were walking around and in danger of being killed when he fired those Scuds into Israel?
Huh? I didn’t hear you.
*
February 19th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Huh? I didn’t hear you.
You are not hearing indeed. Of course Saddam was not worrying if any civilians were killed anywhere. This is what makes him a criminal, duh?
And since you have a hearing problem, again this post is not about Saddam and his crimes. It is about a mistake that led to a crime of burning people to death. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Believe it or not, there are some crimes that happened in Iraq that Saddam did not commit. Some were done by the Americans, some were done by Al-Qaeda, some were done by the Iranian-led militias, and some other done by other criminals.
You are so ignorant that I think you are reading another page and responding here. If you really think that the Amirya bombing was not a crime, my argument would never make sense to you ignorant american “arse”.
February 19th, 2008 at 1:12 am
Indeed, you are wrong to call the Amirya shelter bombing the Iraqi holocaust. The Iraqi holocaust is America’s illegitimate invasion of Iraq and the resulting humanitarian crisis of 4 million Iraqi refugees and possibly up to a million Iraqi dead (no one knows the exact number because they don’t care about the Iraqi dead–notice how the American media only talks about their 4 thousand dead mercenaries, who they have counted meticulously over the last 5 years).
February 19th, 2008 at 1:15 am
BlogIraqi,
Al-Amirya Shelter was a “tragedy” not a “holocaust”. It was precipitated by Saddam’s penchant (repeated in 2003) of posting armaments in civilian quarters for propaganda purposes when they were taken out. Doing that is an actual war crime, not what American bombers did to beat Saddam out of Kuwait (remember “The Rape of Kuwait”?).
I suggest you reserve terms like “holocaust” for geniune hair-rasising atrocities.
For an example of a REAL Iraq Holocaust see
here.
Also, check out Totten’s notes about the “Red Building” here (scroll down) and here.
“Before it was liberated by the Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga, resistance fighters and their family members were arrested, interrogated, and sadistically tortured inside its walls. A free-standing rape room with large windows was built just outside. Bloody women’s underwear was found on the floor after the Baath regime agents were ousted. Inside some of the cells are messages carved by children into the walls. ‘I was ten years old. But they changed my age to 18 for execution.’ ‘Dear Mom and Dad. I am going to be executed by the Baath. I will not see you again.’
“10,725 people were murdered in the Red Building alone by the previous government of Iraq. All died during torture. Formal execution actually took place in Abu Ghraib.
[…]
“One woman recalled tearfully how her newborn baby was fed to dogs in front of her eyes. Another video shows floors stained with blood and fat that liquefied off torture victims and poured onto the tiles below them. What transpired in those chambers is beyond belief.”
Thank God the Ba’ath are out of power and on the run, and many of their enablers will never get a job of executive responsibility again. God bless debaathification.
February 19th, 2008 at 1:59 am
BlogIraqi,
Your attempt at moral equivalence is simply wrong. On 9/11 the Al Qaeda operatives did not have mistaken intelligence that diverted them into the wrong buildings. All along, they INTENDED to kill all those people as an act of terrorism. That was an act of war.
Do NOT try to place the bombing of the shelter in the same category. As you said so yourself, it was a “mistake” made from information the US had acquired about high-ranking officials being in that shelter (and, as Mojo suggests, very possibly given to them by agents working for Saddam). If Saddam had intentionally allowed all those Iraqi citizens to enter the building because he knew it would be targeted, then that is certainly a criminal action, don’t you think? But Saddam, of course, was not only above the law, he WAS the law, so the point within the context of the previous dictatorship is moot.
The actions and goals of AQI, the so-called resistance, and of what you call the “Iranian-led” militias are NOT the same as those of the Coalition forces and the legitimate Iraqi police and military. When a suicide bomber detonates himself or herself in a market in Baghdad, it was not because of a mistake. The carnage was exactly their design. When a so-called resistance fighter kills an Iraqi offical in a drive-by shooting, that offical dies because the so-called resistance fighter seem him or her as part of new government that has usurped their former totalitarians police-state rule (and not a case of mistaken identity). In contrast, American and Iraqi forces are currently trying to protect Iraqi citizens and have had great success once the locals turned on AQI and recognized that it is not the intention of the American forces to harm them but to protect them and aid them in rebuilding their country. There are very few deaths in Anbar these days because of this new situation and new understanding.
*
February 19th, 2008 at 2:06 am
Wow BlogIraqi!
First you cite a tragedy deliberately enginneered by Saddam and blame Coalition for it. Then you claim moral equivalence with the absolutely horrendous actions of the Ba’athists (once again, engineered by Saddam).
THEN you silently delete without noting it my perfectly reasonable comment that expressed a sentiment shared by many Iraqis. Your tacit defense-by-moral-equivalence of the Ba’athists is making more and more sense now.
February 19th, 2008 at 2:08 am
oops! I take that back and abjectly apologize. Apparently a cache problem prevented my comment from displaying. Sorry, about that last comment #27, BI.
February 19th, 2008 at 2:42 am
CMAR II,
I knew that moral equivalence argument was going to show up before too long. It is the refuge of charlatans.
Nonetheless, I think we’ve got a good debate going here.
*
February 19th, 2008 at 3:01 am
Iraqis have a lot to discuss amongst ourselves about the past and present of Iraq. That wont happen while Jeffrey and his ilk obsess over every Iraqi post and leave the stupidity masquerading as “analytical comments” it’s time to take these discussions to Arabic so that this gang of fools can get lost for good.
February 19th, 2008 at 3:21 am
Saleh,
Ah, do you care to be more specific in your rebuttal?
But if you want to just talk amongst yourselves in Arabic, more power to you. I’ve followed some of those conversations over at the Iraqi Blogodrome.
*
February 19th, 2008 at 3:48 am
If this historical event represents just one thing, it is the madness of bombing a country for 40 consecutive days without removing the root of the problem. All that bombing for nothin except another 12 years of sanctions. I’d say that’s pretty fucked up.
February 19th, 2008 at 3:49 am
I meant to say another 12 years of sanctions and more BOMBING.
February 19th, 2008 at 4:12 am
That’s a good point, Mojo (#31).
February 19th, 2008 at 4:58 am
That is a good point, Mojo. A veteran Ranger of Somalia told me that they weren’t nearly so terribly devasted by the deaths of 19 fellow soldiers as they were about the panty-waisted American public that made their deaths meaningless by pulling out of Somalia two weeks later. The same will be true if the US has done all that it has to expunge Iraq of Saddam and his Ba3thists only to let the return permanently or have even worse take over.
Saleh,
Why should Iraqis only converse in Arabic? What? Kurds aren’t Iraqis? I know Iraqi Kurds who don’t speak Arabic. How about French or Russian instead?
February 19th, 2008 at 5:56 am
Schuster perhaps it is time again for you to enter therapy for your obsessive behavior. It seems that whatever mental health advice you were given in the days when you were following the every move of Raed Jarrar has waned. As your therapist for your money back and seek out assistance from other counselors. Or, you could just spend time with your wife. Unless she like the rest of us cannot stand you either.
February 19th, 2008 at 6:10 am
Mojo,
Um, how exactly were we going to take out Saddam with one strike? It’s not like he advertized his coordinates, right? During the Gulf War, the whole point was to take out the entire military control and command facilities in Iraq, most of it centered in Baghdad, which we did, and that took us around a month. Operation Desert Storm began on January 17, 1991.
All of those air strikes helped us prepare to kick the Iraqis out of Kuwait. The ground operations began on February 24, 1991. The ground offensive lasted a couple days until the cease-fire on February 27, 1991. The air strikes were not, in my opinion, unnecessry. They were, in fact, an essential part of the overall plan to reduce the ability of Iraqi command to know what to do and how to respond to events taking place in Kuwait.
I’ve read more than one military history of Operation Desert Storm and it was a very well-designed plan, I can assure you, from 2:38 in the morning of January 17, 1991, when eight AH-64 Apache helicopters and two Pavelow helicopters hit the Iraqi radar stations near the Saudi border, allowing an armada of aircraft to enter Iraq undetected, among them ten F-117 Nighthawk Stealth Fighters, and then a month or so later to the famous left-hook in the desert that caught the Iraqi tankers by surprise.
*
February 19th, 2008 at 6:12 am
Saleh,
You need some cheese?
*
February 19th, 2008 at 6:20 am
BlogIraqi, I was late to the Saddam branch of this thread- Mojo, Jeffrey, and you mentioned him before I brought him up
.
I really don’t want to challenge you on your experience with the shelter bombing. If you want to see the White House’s view of it, though, you can see this. I know, I know, everything the White House says must be lies and whatnot. But actually this entire report talks about Saddam’s manipulation of public opinion as another tool to cement his rule. There’s a picture in that report of fighter jets parked next to the Ur ziggurat, for goodness sakes! Saddam really had no lower limit to what he’d do.
On the other hand, what I see from you and many others is an acceptance of this. That’s just Saddam being Saddam, and so on. The United States is held to a higher standard and is not expected to bomb a civilian shelter and kill hundreds. We try to meet those standards. Most of the time we meet those standards, but sometimes we don’t. That doesn’t make this bombing any easier on friends & family of victims, or witnesses like yourself.
February 19th, 2008 at 6:33 am
Saleh: “Iraqis have a lot to discuss amongst ourselves about the past and present of Iraq.”
Yeah, true dat. Please get started! Iraqi v. Iraqi discussions (in English) are very rare. I don’t think you can blame that entirely on Jeffrey & IBC. Usually we’re very happy to see Iraqis discuss things amongst themselves.
February 19th, 2008 at 7:02 am
Jeffrey, yes it was a decisive victory for the US military and its allies, including Saudi Arabia. Congratulations.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Jeffery,
For the third time, this is not about Saddam. I was there and no one was forced by Saddam to enter the shelter. The shelter was open to the public since the first day of war. And we never saw high-ranked officials going to the shelter.
So, let me get what you are saying in order. The americans get false intelligence information. The americans believe that Saddam and/or his officials are in the shelter. The americans bomb the shelter. And its Saddam’s crime.
Thats very convincing.
CMAR,
I have not deleted any comment, the comments with too many links are automatically held for admin approval in WordPress.
I am not comparing the Amirya bombing to 9/11. I am saying that a mistake leading to a crime is a crime. Thats why people committing second degree murder are prosecuted in your courts. And eventhough it is a second degree murder, it is still a murder.
Rhus,
Saleh is saying that we should discuss in arabic so you (IBC) guys will not participate. Because what you do is jump in and start delivering BS door-to-door to everyone in the discussion, even if you are not welcomed like CMAR. You tend to focus on a single point ,that is mostly not highly relavant, and repeat it over and over again to distract the reader from the original discussion.
Its a good thing according to this fatwa that I was able to gather the refusal of all the IBC bunch on this crime. They refuse to say its a crime. Or, since it is a crime, and it is in Iraq, this brings one cause to it; Saddam.
Oh man you are really out of reason here. And you are getting nowhere with these allegations.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Thanks for your very moving article.
Don’t mind Jeffrey. He was temporarily possessed when he wrote his first comment. He is usually not like that . . . and I don’t think he meant it.
Why can’t non-Iraqis who love Iraq as much as Iraqis, and who want Iraq to succeed, participate in Iraqi on Iraqi discussions?
BTW, you and BT have nice blogs. I also enjoy your comments on other Iraqi blogs.
Peace!
February 19th, 2008 at 8:58 am
BlogIraqi, in my first comment here (#15), I said it was a “horrible tragedy” and told Jeffrey he was over the top with his first comment. You don’t have to agree with me (fatwa and all), but is that BS door-to-door?
February 19th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Anand,
Non-iraqis who love Iraq as much as Iraqis do are very few as compared to people with the agenda that Iraq is bliss and the mighty america is doing all the right things for the poor Iraqis and never make mistakes or commit crimes.
People who come in with constructive criticism are most welcomed.
Rhus,
You tend to be more objective than the other guys of the IBC in pointing what is wrong and what is not. Its just that a lot of diversion from the original subject is done by you guys. And I would count you out of the door-to-door BS distribution.
February 19th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
[BlogIraqi] I am not comparing the Amirya bombing to 9/11. I am saying that a mistake leading to a crime is a crime. Thats why people committing second degree murder are prosecuted in your courts. And eventhough it is a second degree murder, it is still a murder.
Errr…what was the original “crime”? Apparently not the invasion of a neighboring sovereign nation.
February 19th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
So, burning people in a shelter is not a crime. Its payback for invading Kuwait?
Perhaps your dumbasses should have burnt Saddam instead of the civilians, as he was the one behind invading Kuwait and not Amirya people.
Man you are really out of reason and don’t know what to say.
I think you can take it easy and replace your forthcoming comments with “bla bla bla bla” CMAR.
February 19th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
[BlogIraqi]So, burning people in a shelter is not a crime.
You cannot possibly be that dense. If some maniac gagged and bound people in a building and then contracted to have workers come and demolish the building with the innocents inside, I suppose you would say that the contractors had committed murder?? That’s essentially what Saddam did. He did it so ignorant (or deliberately blind) people would go around shouting about how cruel the US was and “why don’t they leave the peaceful Iraqis alone”. Saddam continues to act from the grave through B.S. posts like this one.
This atrocity –this war crime– committed by Saddam is just one more reason among so many why deposing Saddam in 2003 was necessary despite the misery of Iraqis since then. Twisted visions like the bit you’ve written in this post and its comments is a teeny sample of why Iraq has had such a hard road since then and why it won’t be smooth in the near future.
February 19th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
So, Saddam gagged the people and bound them in the shelter and then contracted with the US army to bomb the building?
Despite I have not seen any gagging, maybe he paid the US to kill those people.
“Saddam continues to act from the grave through B.S. posts like this one.”
So now I am a Saddamist?
You must be retarded to think so. Because I can not count how many time I wrote that Saddam is a criminal. You are seriously retarded. Maybe you should get your head out of your ass long enough to read before writing.
“This atrocity –this war crime– committed by Saddam is just one more reason among so many why deposing Saddam in 2003 was necessary despite the misery of Iraqis since then.”
I am sure adding this “despite” does not cost your life or the lives of your loved ones.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:05 am
[BI] So, Saddam gagged the people and bound them in the shelter and then contracted with the US army to bomb the building?
Essentially, yeah. He parked military assets in proximity to a civilian shelter. He did it to accomplish exactly what happened. According to the Geneva Convention that was a war crime because it stripped that shelter of its otherwise inviolate protection from deliberate targeting. Meanwhile, there’s no evidence (quite the contrary) that the US airforce believed the location was being used as a shelter or that they didn’t think Saddam was really there. The bombing it’s not a crime (except on Saddam’s part), its not a holocaust (Saddam has more blood than that on his hands), for the US it is a tragedy.
Let me go one step further: Even if the US airforce KNEW the shelter was filled with innocents, it was not a CRIME to bomb it when Saddam had military assets stationed there. It doesn’t mean they would still DO it with that knowlege or ought to, but it wouldn’t be a CRIME. And the Gulf War broke all molds at the time for US’s careful use of technology to avoid civilian casualties. Only the 2003 invasion of Iraq did more.
[BI] So now I am a Saddamist?You must be retarded to think so. Because I can not count how many time I wrote that Saddam is a criminal.
You write, you write, you write. Since you are so adamant against Saddam, you would not want to further his INTENDED work at the Al-Amirya Shelter with posts like this one —-which say exactly what Saddam wanted said when he succeeded in tricking US into bombing the shelter.
[BI] I am sure adding this “despite” does not cost your life or the lives of your loved ones.
Can you really identify the people who are dead now that would be alive if Saddam were still alive and in control in Iraq? Can you also identify those who would be dead? During the 1990s I was assured that around 1 million Iraqis had died because of the sanctions. Deposing Saddam ended the sanctions. What about the people who would would have been systematically tortured to death by the Ba3thists in the last 5 years? Since you can see all the might-have-beens, I’d like you to do the accounting and tell me how things stand.
February 20th, 2008 at 3:37 am
BlogIraqi and CMar:
You seem to be arguing past each other. This is, in part, due to the fact each of you is relying upon a different definition of the word “crime.”
BlogIraqi is analogizing to the definition of the civil crime of “murder.” However, he has failed to adequately account for the differing subjective mental states associated with different degrees of punishment for that crime. In most countries, the more intentional and premeditated an act of killing; the more severely it is punished. The most severely punished crime of “murder” is murder in the1st degree, followed by murder in the 2nd degree, and manslaughter. For manslaughter, the mental state required of the killer is to have a reckless disregard for the safety of others. Some jurisdictions will go even farther and punish negligent homicide in cases where the killer lacks any intention to do harm, but should have known their actions may have been dangerous to others. Lastly, a justifiable killing is not a crime at all in most jurisdictions. The most common scenario for such a legal finding is where the killer causes another’s death in legitimate self-defense of his own life or of the lives of others.
BlogIraqi is correct that the mental state of the U.S. military target selectors for the air shelter strike may have satisfied the mental state for negligent homicide, but only if, they had failed to meet the customary standard of care when selecting the mistaken target. Under such circumstances, a mistake could constitute a civil “crime.” However, since the target selectors were military personnel acting in a time of war, they are not judged by civilian criminal standards.
When discussing their culpability for the tragedy at the shelter, CMAR is correct to focus on the laws of war, which are quite different than civil criminal laws, since killing the enemy’s forces and destroying his military assets are permissible actions under its rules. Of course, for this reason, much behavior that would bring civil criminal liability for murder or other crimes is permissible for soldiers during times of war.
The bombing of military assets in urban areas is a very tricky issue under the law of war. The military force proposing such bombing must take adequate care to satisfy the legal rule of “proportionality” by which the military value of the target is assessed to outweigh the risk of unintentional civilian death and destructions. This is almost always a gray area. There are frequent disagreement between human rights groups who assert that almost no urban bombing can meet the test and most military legal experts who take a more permissive view. Thus, if the U.S. bomb site selector’s followed the customary duty of care in selecting the shelter target, e.g., they had what they believed to be reliable intelligence that Sadddam, high level Baath leaders, or military leaders were to be in the shelter, the rule of proportionality was probably met. Therefore, it would not be a “crime” under the laws of war.
Also, CMar is correct in his assertion that it is a war crime to attempt to shield a military asset by placing it in a civilian area to protect it from bombing. An even more egregious war crime would be to attempt to disguise civilian assets as military ones in order to attempt to draw international sympathy if the civilian asset is bombed. Nonethless, no matter how one legally defines the hundreds of civilian deaths at the shrine, it was a true tradegy in moral terms.
February 20th, 2008 at 7:46 am
Mark-In-Chi-Town, well put. I would have said that, but was too tired.
Blog Iraqi, thanks again for your amazing blog. I always love your comments at Iraqi Mojo.
“Non-iraqis who love Iraq as much as Iraqis do are very few as compared to people with the agenda that Iraq is bliss and the mighty america is doing all the right things for the poor Iraqis and never make mistakes or commit crimes.
People who come in with constructive criticism are most welcomed.”
I also notice that too many people are not curious enough about Iraqis and their lives. Too many do not try hard enough to see and feel through Iraqi eyes. I’ll try to keep learning from you and other Iraqis. May Iraq succeed in all her endeavors beyond her wildest dreams! Long live Iraq! I love Iraq and Iraqis, and I am not the only one.
February 20th, 2008 at 8:32 am
CMAR,
“Essentially, yeah. He parked military assets in proximity to a civilian shelter. He did it to accomplish exactly what happened.”
This is not true. I was there. And there were no military assets in the whole Amirya area.
Man you are so ignorant and so full of it. Again I suggest you stop BSing around here.
Mark,
“a justifiable killing is not a crime at all in most jurisdictions.
I would like to know how justifiable this killing is?
And you know what, I don’t give a rat’s ass about the civil and military definition of a crime, how about the humanitarian definition of a crime?
My God, these people were burnt to death by the US air-force and you want to deprive us of the right to call it a crime. How suitable for you.
Anand,
Thank you. What do you think of burning people to death in a shelter where no military personnel was around, is it a crime?
February 20th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
BlogIraqi,
I really doubt you saw all the entire neighborhood at all times, let alone the moment of the strike so drop the bull. But if the COUNTRY OF IRAQ had not swallowed up a neighboring country to steal its oil, then that bomb would never have found its way to Iraq. Sheesh, you are so insistent to see the troubles of your country (personalized as your own) everywhere but yourself (or those who you identify with). If its not Saddam (who of course was not Iraqi or supported by Iraqis), then its the Kurds. And if not them then it is US forces trying bust the Stalin of the 1990s. Once again, look in the mirror.
February 20th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
CMAR,
“I really doubt you saw all the entire neighborhood at all times, let alone the moment of the strike”
Yeah and you did.
“But if the COUNTRY OF IRAQ had not swallowed up a neighboring country to steal its oil, then that bomb would never have found its way to Iraq.”
So, burning those people was an act of vengeance. Or to be more precise, it was a mercenary act paid by people seeking revenge.
That explains it all.
February 20th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
[CMAR II] “But if the COUNTRY OF IRAQ had not swallowed up a neighboring country to steal its oil, then that bomb would never have found its way to Iraq.”
[BI]So, burning those people was an act of vengeance. Or to be more precise, it was a mercenary act paid by people seeking revenge. That explains it all.
Don’t attempt to evade the point by pretending to be mentally debilitated. I’m not buying it.
February 20th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
From the link that Rhus provided in these comments:
“Khidir Hamza, former director general of Iraq’s nuclear weapons program, stated in his book, Saddam’s Bombmaker, that during the Gulf War:
‘We sought refuge several times at the [Amiriyah] shelter…. But it was always filled…. The shelter had television sets, drinking fountains, its own electrical generator, and looked sturdy enough to withstand a hit from conventional weapons. But I stopped trying to get in one night after noticing some long black limousines slithering in and out of an underground gate in the back. I asked around and was told that it was a command center. After considering it more closely, I decided it was probably Saddam’s own operational base.’”
That’s a MILITARY ASSET at Amiriyah. I don’t expect you to take anything back. I’m sure it was still a “crime” regardless of the facts because the people were killed and you “deserve the right to call it a crime” because that makes you feel better I guess.
(Why should it? Best not to go into that. I wouldn’t want to hurt your feelings.)
The link provides many more instances of Saddam deliberately constructing military assets in civilian areas. I can even note testimonies of Iraqi bloggers mention anti-aircraft guns being parked pratically in their back yards in March 2003.
February 20th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
[CMAR]:”Khidir Hamza, former director general of Iraq’s nuclear weapons program, stated in his book, Saddam’s Bombmaker,”
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
You have brought the most credible witness ever. This guy is a very great liar that he convinced the US in his congress testimony that Iraq had WMD. All part of the pre-war propaganda. I mean Duffy duck is more credible than this guy. Cheap shot there CMAR.
And to make it easier for you, this guy did not even live in Amirya. He lived in Al-Mansour district in Baghdad and he was out of Baghdad during the war. This I knew from a relative of mine who happened to be this guy’s neighbor.
This reminds me of the little girl that was telling the baby-booth story at the time of the occupation of Kuwait.
Take a look on this guy credibility here.
I can even note testimonies of Iraqi bloggers mention anti-aircraft guns being parked pratically in their back yards in March 2003.
This is true. I even remember when Clinton threatened to bomb the palaces of Saddam, he brought civilians inside more than one of these palaces to prevent them from being shot. And he even bragged about it on TV.
But I believe this was not the case in Amirya because I was there. And you know what, I wished that Saddam or at least some of his gang were there to burn in Al-Amirya, but it turned out that no military official was there after all.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
[BI] This guy is a very great liar
I’m going to base my response SOLELY on the link you provided. When Hamza worked for Saddam in the 1980s and early 1990s, HE DID have huge hidden stockpiles of WMDs and a nuclear program. Even the link you provided quotes David Albright, who investigated Saddam’s WMD capabiity in 2004, saying “Hamza had some good information about Iraqi nuclear programs until his departure from Iraq, but that’s it.” Saddam’s defecting son-in-law said Hamza “exagerated” his actual involvement in Saddam’s nuclear program, but that doesn’t mean he lied about the programs themselves. His credibility about what he heard and deduced about Saddam’s command centers at Amirya and elsewhere positively far outstrips yours. He might have been away from Amirya at the time of the strike, but that doesn’t make him a liar about the shelter when he saw it. If it was true when Hamza saw the shelter, then its not unbelievable that it was true afterwards.
The liar, pedophile, and paid Saddamist mouthpiece Scott Ritter called Hamza a liar…but, frankly, who cares? One might as well ask Mohammed Al-Sahef of his opinion.
But I believe this was not the case in Amirya because I was there.
You were in the shelter? At the time of the strike? Were you free to wander around all parts of it?
I wished that Saddam or at least some of his gang were there to burn in Al-Amirya, but it turned out that no military official was there after all.
You mean “no military official was there at the time”. Actually, “no military official was killed in the strike”. No scratch that. “No military official was killed in the strike according to Saddam’s spokespeople.” Ah! But Saddam’s investigators and mouthpieces are truly credible witnesses, right?
But, BlogIraqi, are you saying that if Saddam or members of his inner circle HAD been in the shelter at the time, then the deaths of the innocents would have been worth it? Because if you are saying that then you have just exonerated the American strike planners. Because they believed they were there.
February 21st, 2008 at 12:22 am
CMAR,
Was that you saying “I’m gone” on the other page?
Are you schizophrenic or something?
Anyway,
So you are saying that Hamza is not lying.
Hans Blix did not say that Iraq did have WMD. And David Kay said:”Anyone out there holding — as I gather Prime Minister Blair has recently said — the prospect that, in fact, the Iraq Survey Group is going to unmask actual weapons of mass destruction, [is] really delusional.”
And Scott Ritter said:”WMDs Saddam had in his possession all those years ago has long since turned to harmless substances. Sarin and tabun have a shelf life of five years, VX lasts a bit longer (but not much longer), and finally botulinum toxin and liquid anthrax last about three years.”
But wait, thats just a scientific fact. It can be lying, but Hamza can not.
The single fact that he was part of the pre-war propaganda is discrediting enough for me.
And again I repeat he was not in Amirya at the time of the war in 1991.
But, BlogIraqi, are you saying that if Saddam or members of his inner circle HAD been in the shelter at the time, then the deaths of the innocents would have been worth it? Because if you are saying that then you have just exonerated the American strike planners. Because they believed they were there.
No. The deaths of the civilians would not have been worth it. And you should go over Norman Schwarzkopf’s book to find out that the US did have the chance to take out Saddam in 1991 and they did not. So, this can’t be the reason behind burning those people.
I believe we’ve had enough of your cheap shots here CMAR. Why don’t you go look for somewhere else to spread your nonsense.
February 21st, 2008 at 1:00 am
[BI] Was that you saying “I’m gone” on the other page? Are you schizophrenic or something?
I didn’t imagine that you would continue to offer such easily debunked responses here. You still have not. When you do that, I decide that there is hope for you.
[BI] So you are saying that Hamza is not lying. Hans Blix did not say that Iraq did have WMD. And David Kay said
You seem to lose track of time. David Kay is talking about after Saddam was deposed. You aren’t denying that Saddam had WMDs and a nuclear weapons program in the 1980s and early 1990s are you? That’s the period Hamza knew about. Saddam’s son-in-law exposed Saddam’s hidden program in 1994, remember?
So NO, absolutely NOT. Hamza was not lying about that. Chemical Ali did not get that nickname because he cooked meth in his basement.
And again I repeat [Hamza] was not in Amirya at the time of the war in 1991.
You have his PDA? Perhaps you were sleeping on his couch in Amirya at the time? Hamza wasn’t lying about Saddam’s secret programs in the early 90s but I think you are.
And you should go over Norman Schwarzkopf’s book to find out that the US did have the chance to take out Saddam in 1991 and they did not. So, this can’t be the reason behind burning those people.
Once again, pretending to be mentally disabled will not let you dodge the point. Are you actually claiming that Norman Schwartzkopf bombed that building because he wanted to kill random Iraqis? Are you serious??? And you call Hamza uncredible?
Stop curling up in a ball and begging me to leave you alone, pansey-ass. If you’re going to respond with insanity, you should do so openly and then take your licks for it. Why don’t you put up a post next inequivocally explaining how Schwarzkopf bombed the shelter for no other reason than to murder innocent Iraqis. Stop saying things and then denying you’ve said them. Try being a man for just a couple paragraphs.
February 21st, 2008 at 1:18 am
BlogIraqi:
You are free to call the tragic deaths of the four hundred civilians in the shelter bombing whatever you wish, including a “crime.” Just don’t expect others to understand what you are talking about since you reject the accepted definitions of that word.
As you did not clarify what you mean by a “humanitarian” definition of the word “crime,” I will have to assume that, such a definition would strip the “evil subjective intent” requirement from the criminal definition of “murder.” If so, then mistakes, no matter how innocent, could give rise to criminal punishment. For example, purely accidental shootings are seldom punished as crimes unless there is a failure to meet a recognized duty of care. Suppose that you went out hunting with some friends in the countryside and you slipped and fell so that your shotgun accidentally discharged killing one of your hunting companions. Would you expect to be criminally punished by the state? If you did not intend to kill your companion, did not act recklessy, and did not violate any duty of care owed your hunting companion, then why should the shooting be considered a crime? Would this act qualify as a “humanitarian crime” under your definition?
I have arleady stated that, if the target selector’s failed to meet the duty of care customary for military personnel in their position, then they would have the mental state necessary for a finding of negliegent homicide. Human Rights Watch suggests the selectors failed to meet the duty of care owed to civilians under the laws of war in their analysis of the incident. If they are correct, this would render the bombing a war crime.
On the other hand, the official U.S. government story is that the selectors had no idea the shelter was being used by civilians since it was surrounded by a barbed wire fence, had a camflouged roof, had military communications eminating from it, and human intelligence reports asserted it was a military facility. It is the U.S. government position that the shelter had a lower floor that was being used as a military command and control center and it was only after the strike that they learned there was an upper floor being used as a civilian shelter. If all these assertions were true, it would lend credence to their case that the customary duty of care was met and that the bombing was a tragic accident, not a crime.
I have know way of knowing precisely why the shelter was chosen as a target or why its heavy civilian use was not accounted for by the selectors. As others have argued, the killing of so many civilians in one strike was a major embarassment for the U.S. military and a major propaganda coup for Saddam’s regime. Thus, it is absurd to think that the target selector intended to cause the deaths of so many civilians in one strike. There is however, one indisputable fact in all of this, that is, at least 400 innocent civilians died a horrible death that night. This was a human tradgey of the highest order, no matter what one calls it.
February 21st, 2008 at 8:49 am
CMAR,
So, now we are going to discuss Iraq’s WMD in post about Amirya Shelter. You guys are professionals in diversion.
[CMAR]:You seem to lose track of time. David Kay is talking about after Saddam was deposed. You aren’t denying that Saddam had WMDs and a nuclear weapons program in the 1980s and early 1990s are you? That’s the period Hamza knew about. Saddam’s son-in-law exposed Saddam’s hidden program in 1994, remember?
The same son-in-law said that Hamza is “a professional liar.”
And since the scientific fact that the weapons Saddam had were useless after all this time does not fit into your allegations, we might talk about the chemical weapons used by the British airforce in Iraq 1919 in Iraq. Maybe Saddam used the leftovers from that time.
Perhaps you were sleeping on his couch in Amirya at the time?
No, but perhaps you were.
Stop curling up in a ball and begging me to leave you alone, pansey-ass. If you’re going to respond with insanity, you should do so openly and then take your licks for it. Why don’t you put up a post next inequivocally explaining how Schwarzkopf bombed the shelter for no other reason than to murder innocent Iraqis. Stop saying things and then denying you’ve said them. Try being a man for just a couple paragraphs.
I will not dignify that with an answer.
What is exactly the point you are trying to sell here?
You want me to say that it was Saddam’s crime that the Americans shot Al-Amirya Shelter?
I will not say that. It was an American crime based on false intelligence.
You can bring all the nonsense you like. And if you think I am a liar, kiss my ass.
I will not go into further discussion with you, because you think I was a liar. So I think me being an eyewitness does not suit your employer’s agenda.
And btw,
I was not begging you to leave, I was asking you politely to f*ck off so I won’t have to ban you from my blog.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:01 am
Mark,
I have know way of knowing precisely why the shelter was chosen as a target or why its heavy civilian use was not accounted for by the selectors. As others have argued, the killing of so many civilians in one strike was a major embarassment for the U.S. military and a major propaganda coup for Saddam’s regime. Thus, it is absurd to think that the target selector intended to cause the deaths of so many civilians in one strike. There is however, one indisputable fact in all of this, that is, at least 400 innocent civilians died a horrible death that night. This was a human tradgey of the highest order, no matter what one calls it.
This I agree with.
Saddam did use it as a part of his propaganda about the “evil” America, and it is such a shame to use the death of those people in this way.
I don’t want to get into the technicalities of the definition of a crime. For me the definition is simple, and killing innocent civilians consists a crime for me no matter the motive and/or reason was.
I wrote this post to honor the memory of the people died that die, but CMAR just could not let it be because it was mutilating to the innocent face of America.
And you would notice how in the IBC guys comments they try their best to distract the reader from the original subject of the post and stick to one point and keep talking about it with a lot of nonsense until the reader is bored and distracted. This is what they do.
If I ever write something that complies with the mighty US policies, I will be their favorite guy in the Iraqi blogsphere. But I don’t care. I will keep writing what I feel right.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:51 am
Iraqi Blogger, you care about Iraqis. It shows in your writing and comments. Please visit us at IraqiMojo.Blogspot.com more often. I always learn from your comments.
Is there a way that I can have comments from your website forwarded to my e-mail? I didn’t know that this discussion thread had grown until I checked again.
Regarding the bomb shelter tragedy, it was not a crime of commission; although it “MIGHT” have been a crime of omission. To give you a proper answer I would have to study all the details about what happened.
What I can tell you is that this bombing was the worse mistake and tragedy of the Operation Desert Storm air war (although not nearly as big as the more than 100,000 Iraqis Saddam slaughter in March of 1991.) Every account that I have read showed Gen Schwarzkopf being irate and heart broken about the tragedy. It was his worst moment in operation Desert Storm.
From what I have gathered, the strike targeted a significant and legitimate military asset. However, under the ROE, military targets cannot be hit if there is a significant risk of hitting civilians. There was a clear intelligence failure on the part of Central Command. They did not know about the civilian shelter. An irate Schwarzkopf demanded to know who was responsible for the failure, but that doesn’t matter. An intelligence failure is an intelligence failure. And over a hundred civilians died as a result.
One can argue that Saddam should have provided Cent Com with the coordinates of all civilian shelters. But then, we all know that Saddam would never provide these coordinates. So it doesn’t matter. One can also argue that Saddam shouldn’t have placed military targets in and adjacent to civilian shelters. But, Saddam deliberately did this throughout the war to protect his military assets (very effectively I might add since Schwarzkopf was paranoid about not hitting civilians), and to try to cause collateral damage from coalition air strikes. But Saddam was Saddam. Saddam did as Saddam does. We cannot expect Saddam to stop being Saddam.
Cent Com still fell into Saddam’s trap. And Cent Com is responsible for it. The buck stops with them.
To definitively determine whether this terrible mistake (even blunder) and tragedy was a crime, we need to know whether Cent Com did all in their power to determine all possible civilian population centers in the vicinity of the military target they were going after. If the answer is yes, it remains a blunder but no crime. If the answer is no, it was involuntary negligent manslaughter.
I don’t want to research this further. It is sad enough as is. I am very sad that it happened (and I am sure that most Americans feel the same way.) Is it very important to research the details? If you think it is very important, I’ll trust your judgment.
CMAR II, and Jeffery, you have got Iraqi Blogger all wrong. He loves Iraq and Iraqis. He is no friend of the “Resistance,” “Baathists,” or “Takfiris.” He supports the GoI, ISF and MNF-I in their war against the bad guys. He also criticizes the GoI, ISF, and MNF-I for any mistakes they make. This is as it should be in the free democracy we all want Iraq to better achieve. I wish the GoI leaders were more like Iraqi Blogger.
On a completely different note, I am delighted that Iraqi Blogger is interested in the ISF. The ISF are very important to Iraq’s future. Very few have been interested in the amazing work done by the LWJ (Bill Roggio, DJ Elliott, CJR, and others) to consolidate all public information regarding the ISF (and Afghan security forces.)
Many in the peace movement hate the ISF, and want them dead. Many others . . . well I don’t know why they have almost no interest in the ISF.
Iraqi Blogger, do you mind if I ask you where you live?
February 21st, 2008 at 10:25 am
Anand,
Even if Saddam presented the civilian location list to Cent Com, no one would take his word for it. He would have marked some of his palaces as civilian places. Man he used to call them “Qusoor Il-Sha3ab (Palaces of the people)”.
There is nothing that he would not do to save his life, including slaughtering people and sacrificing civilians. The issue with Al-Amirya Shelter is that I was there. And I knew people working there. And there was no sign on military existence in the area or in the shelter. Maybe if I did not live there, I would have thought that there were some real military targets there.
But CMAR and his gang arguing that it was a crime is just unreasonable. Maybe if they have lost one person they knew in there things would have been different.
Even the US media refer to the Shelter as a “bunker”. It was not a bunker, it was a shelter. One of the many shelters built in Baghdad that civilians used during the war.
Their hard work to make everyone not complying to the mighty US policy look like either Saddamist, terrorist, …etc. is just too lame. And it makes me feel sorry for the time I spend trying to reason with these non-reasonable people.
Btw,
I mentioned in an earlier post that I have been in Sudan for about 4 months now. Before that I used to live in Jordan from 2005 to mid 2007. And I spent the last year wandering between Amman, Baghdad, Damascus, and Khartoum.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:21 pm
[BlogIraqi] So, now we are going to discuss Iraq’s WMD in post about Amirya Shelter. You guys are professionals in diversion.
Wow. This requires some brass. YOU brought this up and have consistently maintained the discussion. You did it because it is central to ignoring the best evidence anyone has about the shelter at the time. Your position is “The Americans and this guy and that guy LIED about Saddam’s WMDs in 2003 (not were wrong, as was every other credible intelligence organization and the top brass of the Iraqi Army) so anything they say regarding the shelter being also used as a command center is unbelievable.
[BlogIraqi] I wrote this post to honor the memory of the people died that die, but CMAR just could not let it be
Sorry, BI, but this is patent horsesh*t. You’re only interested in it because in your twisted way of looking at things this was an American atrocity (crime) against poor, innocent Iraqis who had no hand in bringing it on themselves. When is the last time you “honored the memory” of the thousands who died due the Iraqi insurgency’s carbombs? The dozens who died at the Al-Gazle pet market did not merit your honor. The Iraqi insurgency chose (until recently, and many still do) to burn down their country rather have it ruled by popular vote. But is no memory worth honoring there, is there?
I think you like this story (as does Baghdad Treasure)because it furthers the Arab meme of the Noble Downtrodden Arab. It is what passes for patriotism among many Arabs these days. Essentially, it desires to turn the Arab nation in to a kind of Imam Ali. But it is actually irrational self-pity, and I consider it hurtful to Iraq and the entire Arab region.
In short, my exasperation has nothing to do *directly* with the US. It’s just that this event is well-documented enough that it can be easily countered in detail. But you keep saying the details –such as the definition of the word “crime”– don’t matter to you.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:32 pm
[anand] CMAR II, and Jeffery, you have got Iraqi Blogger all wrong. He loves Iraq and Iraqis. He is no friend of the “Resistance,” “Baathists,” or “Takfiris.” He supports the GoI, ISF and MNF-I in their war against the bad guys. He also criticizes the GoI, ISF, and MNF-I for any mistakes they make. This is as it should be in the free democracy we all want Iraq to better achieve. I wish the GoI leaders were more like Iraqi Blogger.
Yet, BlogIraqi has no criticism for the insurgency that make all those mistakes more likely and more hurtful when they occur. By focusing on “mistakes” among the good guys in Iraq without regard to enemies they are tasked with defeating –who make those mistakes possible and are the reason those mistakes are so devastatingly hurtful– is to do a little of the work of those enemies.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:53 pm
[anand] But Saddam was Saddam. Saddam did as Saddam does. We cannot expect Saddam to stop being Saddam.
Cent Com still fell into Saddam’s trap. And Cent Com is responsible for it. The buck stops with them.
Let’s do a morality play:
Saddam: Alright all you Iraqis. Dig this tiger pit to catch the Americans!
Iraqis: Couldn’t we just get out of Kuwait and skip the tiger trap?
Saddam: You want some more nerve gas?
Iraqis: Got it. Let’s get busy guys. [Iraqis dig the trap]
Saddam: Now get in there.
Iraqis: What?
Saddam: Do as I say! [Iraqis climb into pit.] Now I’ll just cover this up. heh heh heh [Goes and hides in the bushes] Yoo hoo! Cent Com! I think I see Saddam over here!
[Cent Com comes along, whistling, and falls into the trap, landing on the Iraqis and killing them.]
Anand: Well, obviously the buck stops with Cent Com. We can’t have the buck stop with Saddam, he’s a flaming assh*le. Cent Com are decent people. There for they are to blame for the Iraqis deaths.
Is that your point??
February 21st, 2008 at 10:17 pm
CMAR,
I choose to write about the things that not many other people write about. And I do not have to explain myself to you.
I wrote about other crimes that not so many people wrote about like the BlackWater Crimes, but oh stop. BlackWater are Americans, so they can not do something wrong. Only Al-Qaeda (and whoever America wants) do the bad things.
You are so f*cked up that you are questioning my patriotism with your bullsh*it.
You are not allowed to write another word in my blog.
F*ck you and the people signing your paycheck. I am glad that I annoyed you and your bunch of f*cked-up propaganda interns along with your employer.
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:49 am
CMAR,
I told you you are not welcomed to write anything in this blog. I have deleted your two comments #71 and #72.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:26 am
To Ahmad, the writer of this blog, Salam and Rest In Peace friend. You showed the dignity of a people that have been bombed, invaded and tortured by a giant who is merciless. All I can say is that I hope someday that murderer called the USA will suffer on its soil what you the heroic people of Irak have suffered after 17 years of continuous bombings and invasion. Only then will they know what horror they have brought upon the poor of the ‘underdeveloped 3rd world’ as they call us in Latin America, Asia or Africa. Thanks Ahmad and may your memory nor the memory of the atrocities against Irakis be forgotten.