|
Oh give me a break. What 'sources,' first off... I'd love to see/read/hear them for myself. This tactic of attempting to demonize the enemy rears its head in every conflict. Anyone on 'other side' is painted as having no humanity, no feeling for others, no sense of family. They kill and maim and eat their young, I tell you... They pretend to be civilians, but there's no such thing. The krau.... no, not them this time... the pinko comm...? no.... the Viet Co...? no, not them either... oh yeah, it's the Fayadeen this time... just dress up like women and children or recruit them or... Yes, this is a case of propoganda; but the only proven instance of it I am hearing about, so far, is coming from your "sources."
So you say it seems likely that they have no qualms about putting women and children in a van for a 'suicide mission,' you say... ok, let's go with that. But for what intended purpose?
Propoganda? The "enemy side" will make claims about this stuff happening, whether it does or not. The "coalition side" will look for ways to paint it as not being their fault, no matter what (as evidenced by this theory you're espousing). This would be a fairly futile propoganda effort unless they had made arrangements for someone from a 'friendly' media outlet to video/photo the whole thing and distribute it to international media companies opposed to the war... but that didn't happen.
Setting out to harm others? Well this might be a reason to go on a suicide mission, sure... You wanna blow some people up; and having an atypical person executing the attack helps you to get close enough to do it. And I won't even focus on what more is gained by having 13/15 women and children instead of 5... I won't focus on how you can one day argue that 'the soldiers couldn't possible see who is in the van when they had to make the call;' and then turn around and say that they put women and children in there to make for a more effective suicide mission... I won't focus on how a cleric or government inciting civilians to commit such acts would very likely prefer that 7-10 adults be spread out across 7-10 attacks and not one where they're all huddled together in one van. No... I'll just focus on one missing item: the payoff. Where's the bomb... where is something other than a van just speeding along; not a fully fueled Boeing jet; just a van? Where the hell is the payoff?
Was a family on a joyride? No, surely not... but how about a bunch of scared witless people trying to get the hell out of a place where they're in danger; who were ordered by the foreigners they've been told are invading them, in a language they don't understand, to stop and then being shot at; who have seen everything around them go up in first a short 'shock and awe campaign' and then a more prolonged 'hammer and anvil' strategy; who have been sporadically cut off from all/most communication (not just Iraqi TV being taken out... infrastructure, power, etc., combined with the poverty of over a decade of sanctions making their access to info limited to begin with)...?
Are the soldiers there all evil monsters who are out to kill civilians? Of course not. With very few exceptions, I'm sure (bad apples in every bunch, after all), they're brave men and women who are doing their duty to defend the ideals of their nation by following their orders. But neither is everyone in "the enemy country" a bunch of evil monsters, as portrayed by whichever side one happens to be on. I'd like to end this long post by quoting Ray Bradbury, who, when asked if he had but one gift to bequeath upon future generations, what it would be, is quoted as saying:
"The gift to see that not all Republicans are evil, that not all Democrats are evil, that not all Communists are evil, that not all Negroes are evil, that not all anything is evil. The ability to see the paradox in every person."
cumhail
| 
Linear Mode
