Casualties of Liberation

[Spyder]

There are a lot people that seem to have trouble caring about the faceless statistics behind the collateral damage caused by the war in Iraq. Well, here are their faces. I don't know if it's just that people think that war is 'cool' or if people are simply convinced that everything happening in Iraq is for the better.

I can already hear to replies of "yeah, yeah. Bad things happen in war, we know, we know." Well, how about actually taking it in this time? Imagine yourselves in their positions if you have to.

The faces of the statistics

[Joe]

We already have a thread about this. And bad things do happen in war. Bad things can also happen when you don't go to war. So cut the bullshit, and someone lock this thread.

[RedImperator]

Yeah? And these pictures prove what? War is horrible? Congratulations. You've made your point. So is condemning millions of people to life under a dictator we helped elevate to power and allowed to stay in power when his people rebelled against him not horrible?

[Spyder]

At least stop pretending that it's a liberation. These people don't exactly look very liberated.

[Joe]

OK, then, should I post pictures of dead Kurds to make my point? Good thing we didn't liberate them when we first had the chance, else Saddam wouldn't have been able to kill them. You're just exploiting these pictures to make your point.

[Uther]

We're aware civilians are dying; how do these pictures have any bearing on the truth of Iraqi liberation?

[/list]

[RedImperator]

At least stop pretending that it's a liberation. These people don't exactly look very liberated.

I can post pictures of dead Filipinos and Frenchmen from the Second World War. Are you going to claim that France and the Philipines weren't liberated?

[Spyder]

I can post pictures of dead Filipinos and Frenchmen from the Second World War. Are you going to claim that France and the Philipines weren't liberated?

Red Herring. The citizens of those nations were victims of an occypying force, not their so called 'liberators'.

[Spyder]

We're aware civilians are dying; how do these pictures have any bearing on the truth of Iraqi liberation?

[/list]

Put yourself in their position. Leaflets fall to the ground saying 'don't be alarmed, we're liberating you.' Right before several members of your immediate family are killed by a cluster bomb.

The whole situation wouldn't strike you as a little odd?

[Nathan F]

As is any war of liberation.

While there will be civilian casualties in war, there are a heckuva lot less people getting killed in this war than there will be if we allow Saddam to keep his reign of terror in place, many MANY more will die under his iron fist. And when he dies, and one of his sadistic sons takes over, many MORE people will be killed, more than were under Saddam.

[RedImperator]

I can post pictures of dead Filipinos and Frenchmen from the Second World War. Are you going to claim that France and the Philipines weren't liberated?

Red Herring. The citizens of those nations were victims of an occypying force, not their so called 'liberators'.

And absolutely no civilians were killed during the Allied attacks on their countries, right?

[Spyder]

As is any war of liberation.

While there will be civilian casualties in war, there are a heckuva lot less people getting killed in this war than there will be if we allow Saddam to keep his reign of terror in place, many MANY more will die under his iron fist. And when he dies, and one of his sadistic sons takes over, many MORE people will be killed, more than were under Saddam.

Let's see the numbers.

[Joe]

I can post pictures of dead Filipinos and Frenchmen from the Second World War. Are you going to claim that France and the Philipines weren't liberated?

Red Herring. The citizens of those nations were victims of an occypying force, not their so called 'liberators'.

No, that's not a red herring, there were surely civilian casualties in the Allied liberation of these countries. But, since according to your logic, no liberation can be accompanied by civilian casualties, the liberation of the French and the Phillipines wasn't a liberation at all.

[Nathan F]

We're aware civilians are dying; how do these pictures have any bearing on the truth of Iraqi liberation?

[/list]

Put yourself in their position. Leaflets fall to the ground saying 'don't be alarmed, we're liberating you.' Right before several members of your immediate family are killed by a cluster bomb.

The whole situation wouldn't strike you as a little odd?

Also strikes me as odd that they would be using cluster munitions when they are making precision strikes.

Oh, wait, that's right, they AREN'T using cluster munitions in populated areas!

And, if you will notice, the Iraqis are putting soldiers and munitions in hospitals, schools, and mosques, yet we aren't staging strikes against them, even though it is perfectly legal to, seeing as though they are now a military target.

Hmm, boy, we have some bad morals.

[Spyder]

And absolutely no civilians were killed during the Allied attacks on their countries, right?

Again, let's see the numbers.

[RedImperator]

And absolutely no civilians were killed during the Allied attacks on their countries, right?

Again, let's see the numbers.

Are you seriously fucking suggesting that not one innocent civilian in any Axis-occupied country died during the Allied counterattack?

[Joe]

And absolutely no civilians were killed during the Allied attacks on their countries, right?

Again, let's see the numbers.

France had 470,000 estimated civilian casualties in WWII. You'd have to be a fool to think that not one of those casualties could have been caused by a botched Allied bombing raid, or some other means.

[MKSheppard]

Let's see the numbers.

Just shut the fuck up, will you, Spyda?

Know what we did right before D-Day?

We bombed the main train station in Paris,
full of frenchie civilians and blew it all to hell,
along with hundreds of frenchies.

Why? It was part of our plan to cripple the French
rail transportation network to keep Germany
from rapidly redeploying her divisions from the
East Front rapidly.

[Nathan F]

As is any war of liberation.

While there will be civilian casualties in war, there are a heckuva lot less people getting killed in this war than there will be if we allow Saddam to keep his reign of terror in place, many MANY more will die under his iron fist. And when he dies, and one of his sadistic sons takes over, many MORE people will be killed, more than were under Saddam.

Let's see the numbers.

WTF? He has killed, lets see, around 2 million citizens in Iraq, including pretty much the entire Iraqi congress right after he came into power, and anyone who might be a threat to his power.

Want some numbers? Here is the source, the letter sent by 'Iraqis in Exile in the UK' to British PM Tony Blair. http://www.caabu.org/campaigns/iraqi-exiles-letter.html

[Nathan F]

Should I bring into the meat grinders, acid pools, acid drop chambers, and electrocution chambers he uses for torture?

And the fact that he shoots POWs and forces children as young as 10 years old to fight for him?

[Spyder]

And absolutely no civilians were killed during the Allied attacks on their countries, right?

Again, let's see the numbers.

France had 470,000 estimated civilian casualties in WWII. You'd have to be a fool to think that not one of those casualties could have been caused by a botched Allied bombing raid, or some other means.

I want to know what percentage of them was killed by the allies compared to their captors, and that percentage compared to people killed recently in Iraq by the coalition and by Saddam Husein over any two week time frame.

Compare the percentages, take into account the lack of guidence systems for allied weapons, and then you'll have a clear indication of how many civilians are being killed needlessly. That's one way I can think of that would allow you to back up your claim. Perhaps you can think of something else.

[Spyder]

We're aware civilians are dying; how do these pictures have any bearing on the truth of Iraqi liberation?

[/list]

Put yourself in their position. Leaflets fall to the ground saying 'don't be alarmed, we're liberating you.' Right before several members of your immediate family are killed by a cluster bomb.

The whole situation wouldn't strike you as a little odd?

Also strikes me as odd that they would be using cluster munitions when they are making precision strikes.

Oh, wait, that's right, they AREN'T using cluster munitions in populated areas!

Really?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/ ... al.attack/
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2377605a10,00.html
http://www.delphi.co.uk/cgi-bin/news/ne ... pital.html

[Nathan F]

And this, posted in full, an article from the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2533897.stm

Iraq Dossier
The dossier's introduction:

Iraq is a terrifying place to live. People are in constant fear of being denounced as opponents of the regime.

They are encouraged to report on the activities of family and neighbours. The security services can strike at any time. Arbitrary arrests and killings are commonplace.

Between three and four million Iraqis, about 15% of the population, have fled their homeland rather than live under Saddam Hussein's regime.

These grave violations of human rights are not the work of a number of overzealous individuals but the deliberate policy of the regime.

Fear is Saddam's chosen method for staying in power. This report, based on the testimony of Iraqi exiles, evidence gathered by UN rapporteurs and human rights organisations, and intelligence material, describes the human cost of Saddam Hussein's control of Iraq.

It examines in turn Iraq's record on torture, the treatment of women, prison conditions, arbitrary and summary killings, the persecution of the Kurds and the Shia, the harassment of opposition figures outside Iraq and the occupation of Kuwait.

The United Nations Security Council and the UN Commission on Human Rights have repeatedly, over many years, condemned Iraq's human rights record. But Iraq continues to flout UN resolutions and to ignore its international human rights commitments.

On 19 April 2002, the UN Commission on Human Rights passed a resolution drawing attention to "the systematic, widespread and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the Government of Iraq, resulting in an all-pervasive repression and oppression sustained by broad-based discrimination and widespread terror."

On torture:

Torture is systematic in Iraq. The most senior figures in the regime are personally involved.

Saddam Hussein runs Iraq with close members of his own family and a few associates, most of whom come from his hometown of Tikrit.

These are the only people he feels he can trust. He directly controls the security services and, through them and a huge party network, his influence reaches deep into Iraqi society.

All real authority rests with Saddam and his immediate circle. Saddam is head of state, head of government, leader of Iraq's only political party and head of the armed forces.

Saddam presides over the all-powerful Revolutionary Command Council, which enacts laws and decrees and overrides all other state institutions.

Several RCC decrees give the security agencies full powers to suppress dissent with impunity.

An RCC decree of 21 December 1992 guarantees immunity for Ba'ath party members who cause damage to property, bodily harm and even death when pursuing enemies of the regime.

Saddam has, through the RCC, issued a series of decrees establishing severe penalties (amputation, branding, cutting off of ears, or other forms of mutilation) for criminal offences.

In mid-2000, the RCC approved amputation of the tongue as a new penalty for slander or abusive remarks about the President or his family.

These punishments are practised mainly on political dissenters. Iraqi TV has broadcast pictures of these punishments as a warning to others.

According to an Amnesty International report published in August 2001, "torture is used systematically against political detainees. The scale and severity of torture in Iraq can only result from the acceptance of its use at the highest level."

Over the years, Amnesty and other human rights organisations have received thousands of reports of torture and interviewed numerous torture victims.

Although Iraqi law forbids the practice of torture, the British Government is not aware of a single case of an Iraqi official suspected of carrying out torture being brought to justice.

Treatment of women and children:

Under Saddam Huseein's regime women lack even the basic right to life. A 1990 decree allows male relatives to kill a female relative in the name of honour without punishment.

Women have been tortured, ill-treated and in some cases summarily executed too, according to Amnesty International.

The dossier says that BBC correspondent John Sweeney said he had met six witnesses with direct experience of child torture, including the crushing of a two-year-old girl's feet.

Prison conditions:

Conditions for political prisoners in Iraq are inhumane and degrading.

At the "Mahjar" prison "prisoners are beaten twice a day and the women regularly raped by their guards.

Arbitrary and summary killings:

Executions are carried out without due process of law. relatives are often prevented from burying the victims in accordance with Islamic practice and have even been charged for the bullets used.

Persecution of the Kurds:

Under Saddam's rule Iraq's Kurdish communities have experienced terrible suffering.

Documents captured by the Kurds during the Gulf War and handed over to the non-governmental oprganisation Human Rights Watch provided much information about Saddam's persecution of the Kurds. They detail the arrest and execution in 1983 of 8,000 Kurdish males aged 13 and upwards.

Persecution of the Shia community:

The Shia community, who make up 60% of Iraq's population is Iraq's biggest religious group.

Saddam has ensured that none of the Shia religious or tribal leaders is able to threaten his position. He kills any that become too prominent.

Harassment of the Opposition outside Iraq:

The UN Special Rapporteur has received numerous reports of harassment, intimidation and threats against the families of opposition members living abroad.

Occupation of Kuwait:

Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990. Iraqi forces committed robbery, raped Kuwaities and expatriates and carried out summary executions. Amnesty International documented many other abuses during the occupation of Kuwait.

Methods of torture:


Eye gouging

Piercing of hands with electric drill

Suspended from ceiling by their wrists

Electric shock

Sexual abuse

Mock executions

Acid baths

Conclusion:

This dossier does not include every Iraqi's personal story of suffering, caused by Saddam's regime, known to the British Government.

There are sadly far too many to mention them all. But the evidence in the dossier is a faithful representation of what ordinary Iraqis face in their daily lives.

It is no wonder that, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in 2001, Iraqis have become the second largest group of refugees in the world.

Iraqis also top the table of foreign nationals seeking asylum in the UK.

Saddam Hussein has been ruthless in his treatment of any opposition to him since his rise to power in 1979.

A cruel and callous disregard for human life and suffering remains the hallmark of his regime. [/b]

[Spyder]

Should I bring into the meat grinders, acid pools, acid drop chambers, and electrocution chambers he uses for torture?

And the fact that he shoots POWs and forces children as young as 10 years old to fight for him?

Red Herring. Saddam's mistreatment of civilians does not impact this issue. This thread is about questioning the coalition's methods. "but he's a bad bad man too!" is no excuse.

[RedImperator]

You still haven't answered my question: is it moral to leave the Iraqi people under the rule of a brutal dictator who's continued grasp on power is OUR FAULT? Or are you going be one of Saddam's apologists and claim he's really not all that bad?