April 10, 2003
The Price Is Still Worth It
Madeleine Albright famously laid down the "acceptability" gauntlet in 1996 when she said on 60 Minutes, of the 500,000 Iraqi children killed to that point in time by sanctions that, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."
While Albright's sadism may be untoppable, the mind still boggles at Tony Blair's reaction to a Baghdad marketplace massacre: "We have always accepted that there will be some very regrettable civilian casualties."
What sort of depraved mind could devise such an argument, and what sort of depraved culture could accept it without comment? Is there not one commentator in the mainstream media able to point up that since Iraqis are the ones enduring the suffering, the acceptable level of suffering is theirs to determine, not ours?
An indication of the degree to which the mindset has suffused the culture could be gleaned the morning following V-S day, as a Seattle-based talk show emanating since war's inception from Doha interviewed a Qatari student strongly opposed to the war. Caller after caller regally scolded him that since the military action had freed the Iraqi people (or, alternatively, that Saddam's regime would have killed more people if left in power), then the number of concomitant civilian casualties was hunky dory. (It goes without saying that we're morally obligated to kill as many Iraqi soldiers as possible.)
No doubt the callers -- unlike Blair and Albright -- were well-intentioned, and certainly believed the pretexts. But even allowing for this, and even were both or either true (clearly not the case), we still can't escape the underlying truism evinced by the callers: niggers shan't be allowed to determine their own fates.
Posted by Eddie Tews at April 10, 2003 11:15 PM
Comments
oops, accidentally posted this under the wrong article. I meant to post it here: Dear Eddie Tews and anyone who agrees with him: You are certifiably full of shit and need to have your head (which has been shown to be full of hot air) examined. I am so damned sick and tired of hearing bleeding heart pussies cry about the collateral deaths of innocent Iraqis that it makes me sick. You seem to disregard the fact that many Iraqis were willing to risk death by having a bomb, though intended for a military target, accidentally fall on them rather than continue living under the rule of Saddam Hussein's Baath party. How do I know this? I would think the fact that most residents of Baghdad did not get the hell out of that city when they knew it would have bombs raining on it shows that they wanted to stick around and enjoy the city in the post-Saddam days. And don't tell me that they couldn't leave, either. The regime could not have kept the entire civilian population there if they had wanted to leave. Also, I have many friends who are Arabic, two of whom are Saudi, and they have expressed nothing but relief that this was finally happening. Also, I would hope you're not so thick headed to not notice what's going on in the streets of Baghdad and other cities, where thousands of jubilant Iraqis are showing how they truly feel about this war. Whining maggots like you fail to realize that many Iraqis, much braver than the likes of you, were willing to pay the ultimate price so that their posterity would live better lives in their homeland without having to flee to America. They were willing to risk death so that they and their children could enjoy a better life. Let me suggest that you go rent "Braveheart" and listen to the speech William Wallace gives to his troops right before their first major battle. Trite of an example as it may seem, it is still fitting to this day. Also, how pathetic it is of you to point fingers at the coalition forces who have accidentally killed Iraqi civilians. First, let me point out the undisputable FACT that had this undertaking been attempted by any other group or military, Saddam would not have been able to have been removed from power without killing at least 100 times as many innocents. You should count your lucky, bleeding-heart stars that the US and UK have such precision weapons that they were able to go about the war in the manner in which they did. Every single American soldier who died over there could still be alive today if our government had taken a different approach to the war. Taken to the furthest extreme, I'm saying that we could've just dropped a few MOABs on Baghdad and that would've been that. Mission accomplished, no American casualties. But hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would have died, so instead we took the road less travelled, and did the best we could. Yes, a few (relatively) civilians were killed, just as a few (relatively) Americans were killed. To which I say, at the risk of sounding a lot more callous than I really am: tough shit. WAR IS HELL. Anyone with a decent head on their shoulders knows this. When wars are fought, people die. It's that simple. There has never been a war in the history of the world where innocent people haven't been killed. You have to understand that in order to affect change of this magnitude (i.e. removing a regime that wants to stay), people are going to die. Military and civilian. Again, you should quit your crying and just be thankful that more Iraqi civilians, by about 100 fold, weren't killed. Instead, we chose to send our own people into harm's way. What would you have us do? Have both sides agree to play paint-ball or laser-tag and whoever wins gets the prize? People are going to die. Get over it. Again, realize that some people, much braver than yourself, were willing to trade their lives for what they believe in, even if they weren't carrying a weapon. And personally, as an American, I care more about relieving the Iraqi people from the brutal oppression under which they've lived for the last 30 years than I do about finding WMD. Hopefully some WMD will be found so that our original pretense will be justified, but the way I see it, I care more about suffering human beings than I do about weapons which haven't yet been employed. This is not to say that I think we should've sat back and done nothing about these weapons. Anyone who says that nothing should have been done is a fool who is always willing to concede the first blow to the enemy before he/she decides to take action. If you know your opponent is going to take a swing at you, just because you beat him to the punch doesn't mean it wasn't self defense. Anyone who argues otherwise is going to lose an awful lot of fights in their lifetime. Why must innocent Americans die before we're willing to take action? Ask yourself that one. And if the US and UK are so attrocious for this war, how would you have gone about doing it? I suppose you would've had a better plan? You're nothing but an arm-chair quarterback who chose to talk about world events instead of football. Get a life and try to look at all sides of a situation before you decide, next time, that you're "anti-anybody dying" even though the outcome will be well worth the cost. -- Posted by: Bill Whitlock on April 11, 2003 05:22 PM
i couldn't agree with this post much more. its very true, war is hell and people are going to die.
have you forgotten about the ultimatums made by the US to Saddam Hussein?? It was war that he wanted, and it was war he received.
Saddam thought he had manipulated MANY more people than he actually did.
i as well am friends with an iraqi that moved here in 1985. after seeing the people dancing in the streets after the regime fell, he said "Iraq has been waiting for this day for 30 years. It's almost hard to believe". -- Posted by: david williams on April 11, 2003 11:07 PM
oh, saddam hussein was no threat...no threat at all...
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11JORD.html?ex=1050638400&en=ea21e8c88feae21c&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
right??
-- Posted by: david williams on April 11, 2003 11:22 PM
Wow. Being called a "pussy" and being told I'm "full of shit" magically changed my position to pro-war. I'm amazed that no one has been intelligent enough yet to come up with this logical ploy and use it against me. How can I counter that? Now that I see it in print, I realize you must be right. It's got to be true, or it wouldn't be online. I was a being pussy. I don't want to be a pussy, or be full of shit, so I'll agree with you. Go Bush! Yay war! Screw the international community! They're pussies too! The Geneva Convention is chock full of shit also! Who needs more humane methods when massive "shock and awe" campaigns kill the fuckers more quickly? Fuck the civlians, man, they were in the way. If they can't live through an explosion, well then, they're just pussies. -- Posted by: Jason Thornton on April 14, 2003 11:30 AM
Anyone against the liberation of the Iraqi people should try living under Saddam's regime for a while and then tell us to be anti-war. -- Posted by: Dan Zebold on April 22, 2003 07:42 PM
If you think that's bad, can you imagine forcing Whites to actually try to integrate negroids into their culture? What a catastrophe that has been! Now every city is being destroyed by the basket-ball dribbling prognathous tree swinging knuckle dragging ho-pimping spear chucking microcephalic equatorial negroids. -- Posted by: Mark Johnson on September 14, 2004 05:31 PM
by the way i am the real dan zebold and the previos posting was posted by someone who knew my old e-mail address i do not agree with any of the comments that this posting has represented. i am disgusted that someone would do this under my name and pass it off as if i had said it -- Posted by: Daniel C. Zebold on October 17, 2004 10:03 PM
nevermind about the last posting....honest mistake -- Posted by: Dan Zebold on October 17, 2004 10:05 PM