|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland |
US tanks cheered on the streets of Baghdad national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Wednesday April 09, 2003 11:17 by Damien - Freedom House nospam at hotmail dot com
 Socialist regime begins to crumble Sky News just showed raw uncut footage of an older man with glasses overwhelmed with joy in front of a government building in Baghdad. He was holding a banner of Saddam's face that had been ripped down and was beating the picture of Saddam in his face with his shoe. Sky had Iraqi analyst Hamid Ali Alikfay in the studio and he did free translation of what this man was yelling. "Saddam has killed millions of us....this is the day we have been waiting for. We are Iraqis, but we are with the United States. We are Americans."
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (34 of 34)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34You anti-war people can shove that in your pipes and smoke it, can't you?
Since when was Iraq under Saddam Socialist?
On a related issue,
Powell tells Syria to watch its step or we´ll liberate you!
Can't you see this is pure Zionist propoganda? All the people cheering are actors hired by the CIA. My narrow minded hard left ideology has never been wrong before, I mean those people in Eastern Europe:Romania, Chezchoslovakia, Poland really loved the brand of collectivism I support.
It was only due to Americian pressure that they got rid of it after the USSR crumbled.
I certainly can't see something as inconsequential as 24million people being liberated shifting my world view one iota.
I can but applaud my fellow comrades who see this war for what it really is... a disgusting grab for oil. Bush is a Nazi too!
Since thousands where getting murdered under a dictatorial regime? The brutal suppresion of individual freedoms? Those always seems to be a good sign's of socialism being implemented.
Did I mention those other paragons of liberty Cubas and Libya. That's right.Marx in action also.
The Ba'ath party was founded in the early 50's with many of the same ideas as Uncle Joe's workers paradise.
Ba'ath Party Arab political party, in Syria and in Iraq. Its main ideological objectives are secularism, socialism, and pan-Arab unionism. Founded in Damascus in 1941 and reformed, with the name Ba'ath, in the early 1950s, it rapidly achieved political power in Syria.
Eh. Anti-war protestors were anti-WAR, not anti-freedom. It's too early to celebrate. Baghdad isn't under control, US forces aren't even in the Mosul or Kirkuk. Turkey could still invade.
If you think this war was about Iraq, you are wrong, James Woolsey, ex-CIA chief has said this is World War 4; it will be a bloodbath. Iran and Syria won't be pushovers like Iraq because they haven't been subject to economic or military sanctions and have not been at war recently. Also Iran is not a dictatorship and few Iranians will appreciate being invaded.
More on WW4:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/04/03/sprj.irq.woolsey.world.war/
The precendents set in this war and its consequences will mean thousands of innocent lives will be lost in the next decade so long as the neo-cons remain in power in the USA.
Who knows what kind of "freedom" will be granted to Iraqis. Give it a few months before Iraqis start slitting US and puppet throats.
To quote BBC report on celebration in Eastern (Shia) Baghdad:
What the crowds are saying is "we are glad that Saddam Hussein is gone or going - but we don't like the Americans, and what we want is to be able to rule our own lives."
Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2932093.stm
I've no dougbt most Iraqis despise Saddam just slightly less then they despise the US invadeders. But if this is the best 'proof' that the pro-war crowd have of 'support' for the invasion you have to weep.
Guys have a look at the footage of Hitler rolling onto the Sudetanland or Austria back in the 1930's which the invaders also portratyed themselves as liberators. He had shit loads of people lining the streets to cheer him. Wake up guys, Bush is not going to even get this unlesd Hollywood is flown in to manufacture it. As happy as most people are to see Saddam going they are not overjoyed at the thought of being occupied by those who have subjected them to 12 years of starvation, poverty and the death of their children. Basra is proof of this - the Iraqi regime has been destroyed there but far from cheering their invaders the population are looting what they can in the period before the invaders take over as cops (as as it more likely put the old cops back on the street under US command).
Extract from Pilger article,
Unelected in 2000, the Washington regime of George W Bush is now totalitarian, captured by a clique whose fanaticism and ambitions of "endless war" and "full spectrum dominance" are a matter of record.
All the world knows their names: Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Cheney and Perle, and Powell, the false liberal. Bush's State of the Union speech last night was reminiscent of that other great moment in 1938 when Hitler called his generals together and told them: "I must have war." He then had it.
To call Blair a mere "poodle" is to allow him distance from the killing of innocent Iraqi men, women and children for which he will share responsibility.
http://www.johnpilger.com/print/129139
"Saddam has killed millions of us....this is the day we have been waiting for. We are Iraqis, but we are with the United States. We are Americans."
(Extracted from the above article)
I think many anti-war protestors have failed to take this into account. I have been trying to make this point on this web site for some time.
This gentleman only represents one Iraqi person. There are many other Iraqi's who do not share this view. Nevertheless there are many who do share his view.
Anti-American establishment (a view which I share) I believe has clouded the judgement of anti-war protestors.
I am not saying this war is right. At this stage, I simply do not know anymore.
But what I am more sure about, is that the postive points that this war will bring to the Iraqi people, ie the removal of Saddam and his brutal regime has not properly been weighed up in people's minds.
are confronted with the truth.they will come up with a million excuses and explanations as to why the evil US will never win or be right.I bet they will claim next that all the film footage of the cheering ,looting,iraquis were put together by computor graphics in a Hollywood studio to be pre released to all the news media.Wonder what they will say when the Iraqui public relations mouth piece with the bad comb over is bundled off the camera by the Marines,still volubly denying that the US army is in Bagdad ? Same like that they all denied that the Iraquis were not using their own people as human shields.Of course breaking that rule of war is acceptable to the lefty liberal pukes who have never been in combat.same like using pregnant women as human bombs,no doubt a ligitmate method of fighting back against evil Americans.even the Nazis never sank to such lows.
Watching BBC News 24 here which has just screened photos of US Marines being 'welcomed' into Saddam city by a few hundred of the local Shia population. Except when you look at these images you see these men are holding stones and Green flags aloft (both religous symbols) and beating their chests in a fashion that should be familar to the marines that survived the Beriut embassy bombing.
Continuing above message
When US troops liberated cities in France and even Germany during WWII there were lots of 'stars and stripes' in the crowd. From what we have seen of the Iraqi 'welcome' its also clearly a statement that the goals of the local population is very different from anything the invaders will approve of. (they are also chanting 'Saddam is the enemy of god')
If this war proves anything it proves that it is pointless continuing with the pretence that there can be rules of war.
The US has thrown out the rule-book (in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo Bay) , choosing an a-la-carte approach based on the Israeli model employed in Palestine, and her enemies faced with overwhelming power can not fight a war by conventional means.
What is sure is that overwhelming US power will force her opponents into ever more extreme acts of terrorism as they have no hope of keeping pace with the American war-machine.
The price of the US/K victory when it inevitably comes will be an age of ever increasing political instability and outrageous terrorist attacks where the citizens of the US and her allies will no longer be safe in large portions of the globe.
protesting protests in proposal: pro-protest. protesters posting posters protesting pro-protest. pro-protest proposing protest post anti-pro-protest. post proposal poster posts proposal - pro-protest. the page lies empty, gleaming, chewed up pencil tip's end scrapes equal empty inner ear to beat a drum beckoning pro-'castor nations all towing long denied religion of protective packaged pocket . . . scum? question calling more "decision cry" as many one, announcing system's end by quick suck 'cessive, symptom, attic son. to 'morrow was today turned to try and break the past, that protected now exchanged ever constant screaming "golden calf" ignored protests potent ignorance kept tight to possess demonic laugh, keep proposing posters painting pictures unprocessed, procession deems decision doomed - all avoid abandonment. keep the faith, (it's not very funny) - die.
Or the pictures of a group of smiling kids in Basra, one of whom made a very quick shooting sign at the reporter as he turned away, still smiling. Guess the editors hadn't spotted that. Anyone who thinks all will be rosy now that the liberators have captured Baghdad should look to news reports from Afghanistan to see what might happen in Iraq.
logical, sideways, deconstruction of our simple world removed from main page . . . objection? must news be so simple now . . . alternative? SIMPLETON! . . . REASON PLEASE . . . some papers have crosswords others jokes, some even have mews - - - closely related to news, why must all that is allowed (yes allowed) be such badly written, much unsupported, major propaganda on the whole - up your hole. Love the idea, am beginning to resent the outcome.
Just to add a final comment for now. There is a real opportunity for freedom here for the Iraqi people. One dictatorial regime is pretty much finished. The US plans to impose another. But it will take days if not weeks for them to fly in their stooges and get the cops back on the streets. In that space the Iraqi people could get themselves organised to resist the imposition of a new dictatorship - something I'm sure 99% of the anti-war movement would back them in.
It would be hard for Bush/Blair to sell militarly putting down such a rising - they of course would move against it anyway (which is why they are talking about putting the old cops back on the street right now). There is an opening here, as there was at the end of the last Gulf war. See below for what happened then
One possible reason for the massacre between Kuwait city and Basra could have been the rebellious feelings of many of the fleeing conscripts. Though the West wanted rid of Saddam it would much prefer a palace coup within the Ba'athists then a popular uprising. It was possibly, also, for this reason that his elite imperial guards were left fairly intact. On the 29th of March one of the first tanks back into Basra destroyed a poster of Saddam. A generalised uprising soon gripped the area.
The rising in the South was portrayed by the media as exclusively Shia Muslim in character. However this area of Iraq has always been strongly secular. Basra, Nasariah and Hilah were traditional center of the Iraqi Communist Party (effectively wiped out in the sixties). Had the rebellion lasted longer there might have been some appearance of socialist ideas on the agenda.
In the North according to some sources[1] quoting participants in the Kurdish uprising there may have been up to 100 'shoras' or workers councils. These were active in the fight against the Ba'athists. They also came into conflict with the nationalists of the Kurdish Front (KF) and the Stalinists of the 'March of Communism' (RAWT) group.
The nationalist forces seem to have been extremely unpopular in some areas. One witness said that Jalai Talabani (who later signed a treaty with Saddam) was not let into the town of Sulaymaniyah. Massoud Barzani of the Kurdish Democratic Party had two body guards killed by the people of Chamcharni.
Shoras called for self-determination, bread, work and freedom including freedom to strike, for a "shoras government", for womens' equality and that people should control their own economic and political destiny. It would appear that a revolution which began as a nationalist one was being taken further by workers fighting for a social revolution. According to one activist "a large part of the shoras movement didn't acknowledge the KF's social authority".
Of course the KF have since brokered an agreement with Saddam which recognises his authority in return for an autonomous region. The lessons of the Gulf massacre and the Kurdish uprising seems to be that nationalists have no answers. Neither Saddam, Yasser Arafat, the KF or any bourgeois outfit have anything to offer workers fighting imperialism in the Gulf region.
All nationalists eventually find themselves in collaboration with the imperialists and only step out of line to pursue their own interests (as in Saddam's case). The working class must assert it's interests. They must break with nationalism and boot out all the Emirs, Sheiks, petty dictators and imperialist stooges.
Only in a revolutionary war against the imperialists and their own rulers can the really defeat imperialism as a force. Only through fighting for real socialism can they take revenge for the crimes of the imperialists.
1 The Kurdish Uprising and Kurdistan's nationalist shopfront and it's negotiations with the Ba'athist/Fascist regime
[Taken from http://struggle.ws/ws92/gulf34.html ]
I take your point about stones and green flags being held aloft by a certain amount of Iraqis.
But regarding your statement:-
"When US troops liberated cities in France and even Germany during WWII there were lots of 'stars and stripes' in the crowd."
What exactly is your point here?
This showed they were welcoming the 'liberators' (a fair term in that context) and not simply celebrating the downfall of the old regime. The long post I sent above explains where I'm coming from in more detail.
BTW relevant to what may happen now is found from the 'liberation' of Greece. There there was an attempt by the population to decide what form their liberation should take. The RAF were used to bomb them (anarchists in the RAF led a mutiny in Cario in response) and the German Army were rearmed and used to suppress the Greek rising. End result, the people were defeated and Greece was a military dictatorship until the fall of the generals in 1976.
The point is that those stars and stripes were obviously supplied by US forces. I am not claiming that the people weren't glad to be liberated. I just doubt that French Resistance had spent previous 5 years secretly making American flags.
The text of a talk I did a few years ago on what happened in Greece is at http://struggle.ws/talks/greece.html
It concentrates on the role of the CP in betraying the rising so its a bit weak on what the Allies did but some of its in there. One highlight
"As the peace talks continued British forces occupied more and more of Greece. The ELAS [resistance] started to fragment in particular over the execution of 114 trade union officials. Many surrendered and others were arrested and charged with common law crimes like the murder of German soldiers. By July of 1945 20,000 had been arrested and 500 executed. This compares to 2313 anti-fascists executed by the Nazi's and 20 executed by the government for collaboration with the Nazi's."
Some might have been distributed by the US for the big filmed screens but in fact people did make them themselves as well. There are a good few historical accounts of this but also I know someone who was a young girl in Germany at the time but old enough to remember the liberation.
Fair enough. About the German girl who made the US flag though? Was this in celebration of liberation or in celebration that it wasn't the Soviets doing the liberating?
The anit war crowd in Ireland are just like the regime of Saddam Hussein - in tatters. They have fallen apart just like the thugs that killed and killed and killed and tortured innocent civilians for years in Iraq.
Once 100,000 marched in Dublin. Then it dwindled to 1,000 in Shannon when they said they would rip down the fence.
Then only 500 turned up and tried to block the center of democracy itself - The Oireachtas. They cliamed police brutality but could not show one single picture to prove this despite the dozens of so-called Indymedia freelance journalists there with their camcorders and digital cameras.
Even when President Bush landed in Ireland, 2,000 is all they could muster from the entire Island to protest. And what a farce that was, giving the platfornm to Mitchell Mc Laughlin and the PSF/PIRA organisation. Thet was probably the last straw for everybody. Since when did PSF/PIRA become 'anti war'? How could they stand beside such a man who speakes for an organisation that wont hand up its semtex or give back Jean McConvilles body to her children. This kind of stuff makes decent people puke.
Now they head to Shannon again. Lets see how many hunderd fools wlll turn out. Of course the die hards will be there, the ones who don't shower. But try to spot a decent individaul who understands the meaning of the words 'peaceful protest'. You wont see any. They copped on weeks ago to what was going on.
Good riddance to the anti-war shower. Welcome Iraqi freedom.
You are making two rather dubious assumptions.
1. That the war is over (from listening to the Pentagon it is only starting and will engulf many countries and involve the death of many innocents).
2. That Iraqis are free. Where is your evidence for this. I see lawlessness, looting and murder, not freedom.
Come back to indymedia in 6 months and crow about the war being over and Iraqis being free. And back your claim up with evidence too. I doubt you'll be able to.
As for anti-war crowd being like Saddam's regime: Back your puerile accusation with evidence please. Evidence of anti-war protestors killing innocent people.
She was in the South West I think so it was unlikely that the soviets would have got there first. Take your point though that this could have had some influence in other areas. Anyway this techical detail obscures the original point that in this one case where the US troops can be described as liberators they were being greeted in rather a different manner then they are in Iraq.
As to the pro-war poster above. Understand this - we also support Iraqi freedom but unlike you we understand that such freedom can only be won by defeating BOTH Saddam and western imperialism. It's now open knowledge that the Iraqi 'advisors' the US is using include people who until they went into exile were amongst Saddam's worst generals. You continue to believe that putting these guys in power as US puppets = freedom for the Iraqi people. History (see above) suggests something quite different.
But don't worry. Just as the media moved on from Afghanistan so they will move on from Iraq. If you stay away from the little items in the back pages of the liberal papers you won't have to be aware as the new torture chambers swing into action. Enjoy your guilt free war trip.
"but unlike you we understand" Is is always nessecary to belittle others using snobbery and sarcasm on this board. Grow up.
"that such freedom can only be won by defeating BOTH Saddam and western imperialism".
That sounds great, now how would one go about that exactly? Starting with, let's say, the currently toppling regime in Iraq.
Thanks for claifying your statment on the US flags in 1945.
Regarding your comments to the war supporter. Clearly she does not understand the horrors of US/Western Imperialism, as most of the world dosen't (though thankfully I believe that more and more of the world is beginning to learn what is really going on).
But in this particular instance of US imperialism, though the new Iraqi government that comes into power, may be far from ideal, surely it will be 10 times better that the Saddam regime??
The US/K will be under extreme international scrutiny to ensure that they do not simply install a puppet government. Nevertheless they will have a huge influence on who takes over Iraq but as I say surely it will be far less gruesome and murderous than the Saddam regime.
The Iraqi people would probably have overthrown Saddam/his sons at some stage, but this could have take a very, very long time to happen.
I wonder did anyone else see the interview with "Buck" of the ORHA, an allegedly sinister (even according to the BBC) organisation for reconstruction (?) and humanitarian aid on Newsnight, BBC2. Buck is due to take control of or is in fact in nominal control of Southern Iraq. This interview followed a reportage on how the British troops were trying to help some of the more capable citizens (or words to that effect) of Umm Qasr to make decisions about town business.
The pistol carrying Buck stated quite clearly that the US had its own interests and that basically they didn't care how the Iraqis organised themselves as long as they were open for trade. In fact I've just had a look at the site and I believe that the programme can be downloaded at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/2929907.stm
under the "latest programme" on the right hand side.
Highly, recommended. Any chance someone with the necessary skills could download this from the BBC site and post up the relevant part of the programme (interview with Buck Walters) to some site and paste links to it all over the place.
The ORHA is not an organisation. The Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance is the new Pentagon-controlled government of Iraq. ORHA's Director, Jay Garner (ex-US general) is effectively the new president of Iraq. He reports directly to General Tommy Franks, who heads USA's CENTCOM in Doha, Qatar.
The ORHA will split Iraq into three, and Buck Walters will administer the southern third
For more info see:
http://washingtontimes.com/world/20030409-65289160.htm
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=focusIraqNews&storyID=2533576
From anonymous
"though the new Iraqi government that comes into power, may be far from ideal, surely it will be 10 times better that the Saddam regime??"
Despite opposing the war I would hope this will be the case. I don't hope for a new dictatorship to confirm my opposition to the war - I hope Iraqis will be able to win real freedom.
But I reckon this won't be the case. I don't think the corporations or the imperialist powers can afford to allow the people of Iraq any real freedom. I think the lesson of the whole region is that freedom or even a genuine parliamentary democracy is not allowed. I've travelled in some of the somewhat more free countries like Egypt, Morrocco and Tunisia all of which have torture chmbers and political prisoners. All are 'better' then Iraq but none have significant oil supplies.
Right now Iraqi people are going to be looking for everything that has been suppressed and denied for decades. This includes in the north the freedom to seceed from Iraq, something neither Turkey nor the US will allow. This includes in the south the freedom to move much closer to Iran, something the US will not allow. This means in the centre the freedom to control the countries natural wealth, something the oil companies will not allow.
So in the years ahead whatever regime comes into being will have to stop people taking these freedoms for their own. We know what methods are used elsewhere in the region to keep people under control. We know what methods have been used, with western support, in Iraq in the past.
Will it be '10 times better then Saddam'. If perhaps they can hold down the people with 1/10 of the terror he used then perhaps so. Is that freedom? I don't think so, it is the right to keep your mouth shut in return for a reduced chance of torture, imprisonment or murder.
As said near the top of this thread I think the people of Iraq do have a chance to win freedom. But if as seems certain Saddam is now gone they have to win it AGAINST what the US wants to impose on them. I wish them every luck in doing so and I'm sure most anti-war people will do the same.
[As I'm writing this I'm watching images from outside the hotel where on the one hand Iraqi people are trying to pull down the statue and on the other an argument has broken out between a western anti-war protester and US marines).
It's streaming technology (realplayer) in this case, which means you can't really download it.
I understand that what Andrew was saying was that he understands that "freedom can only be won by defeating BOTH Saddam and western imperialism". I understand that he also understands that you have a different understanding of the situation. There is no snobbery or sarcasm inherant in stating ones understandings or suggesting that they might be different to others understandings.
There is belittling inherent in the command "Grow up" (pardon de pun!).
He framed his arguement wholly on the presumption that he had a better understanding of the facts. Not by discussing those facts, nor by debating the point, but simply by dismissing her points out of hand.
I would consider that intellectual snobbery... which I think is extremely immature, thus "grow up". If it seems belittling, that's because I do consider his methodology to be 'small'.
It is something that happens on this board a lot. Which is a shame because there are often well-written pieces and excellent debate. I find it a shame that these debates are often stifled by arrogance and pomp.
Then why not be _bigger_ than him and respond to his "belittling" arguements.