2005/03/09

Children of Iraq (click here)



Via Je Blog

We know all to well what living in slums surrounded by gangs, drugs and poverty does to children. We know what adulthood holds for most of them. They bear the fruit of their childhood.

Thinking on this, what does the future hold for the children of Iraq? Don't say better than it did with Saddam. For some this may be true but certainly not all or even most. Don't say they will be free. They are not free now and the future of Iraq is very uncertain at this point.

What we do know is that no matter the state of Iraq as a country in years to come the psychological scarring of these little ones will bear fruit and it will not, can not be healthy. Sabbah

17 Comments:

The children that suffered through the horrors of WW2 grew up to be good citizens and productive members of society for the most part. Iraqs' future may be uncertain right now, but the chances of a better Iraq are much greater than they were under saddam.

The socialist whiny unrealists, such as yourself and the crew on this blog, want perfection right now, and when it isn't perfect right now you see only the dark possibilities in the future, never once will a ray of sunshine break through your gloomy forecasts, unless of course it bodes ill for America.

As I used to tell a man I worked for when he wanted something done "right now"....You can have it right or you can have it now, but you cannot have it right, now. 

Posted by Kender
3/09/2005 05:10:00 pm  
Kender what do you know about children that suffered through WW2? I would like to see your stats, Kender but I suppose you would ignore them as you have all the others. Hmm I will see what I can find.

Tell the Iraqi children there will be a ray of sunshine someday, Kender. Just buck up, kids. Uncle Kender is telling you all the way from America..we did it for your own good and it will be better one day. It's you Kender that is not able to face reality. It's you who cannot face the horror of what you're responsible for so of course, there's nothing to do but make excuses.

You should be ashamed Kender, to have looked at those pictures and not feel anything but sunshine and then come back here and advertise your heartlessness. 

Posted by Dianne
3/09/2005 06:18:00 pm  
Kender wrote: "... Iraqs' future may be uncertain right now, but the chances of a better Iraq are much greater than they were under saddam. "

Yep ! this is exactly what G.W(ar)Bush & his gang are repeating again and again ... very funny indeed ;-) 

Posted by Mohsan
3/09/2005 06:22:00 pm  
Kender... For starters, the children that suffered the true horros of WW2 didn't live to tell about it. And those that did survive, built the world as we know it today, on a rather shaky foundation of greed and hate.

Their only solution to every conflict is violence. Both parties are guilty of it. And that not really my idea of a happily ever after.

While I admire your relentless optimism, I do have to wonder where conservatives really stand on this issue of "saving the children". See...one day I read commentaries about how television teaches children violence and homosexuality, and the next day they're telling me that they can live through war and be good citizens, and contributing members to society.

Perhaps this logic is beyong the limited understanding of loony liberals (I think it's really funny that I've been labelled one, not that I'm complaining...) So could you perhaps enlighten me? 

Posted by anna.
3/09/2005 06:34:00 pm  
"The children that suffered through the horrors of WW2 grew up to be good citizens  "

Ah hem.... lemme try to understand your reasoning: WW2 was a horror ... BUT ... it wasn't so bad after all seeing the kids who survived it made it to be "mostly" normal ppl?

Ah, now this explains why the US should use this fine example of humanitarian achievement and wage a miniature WW3 on Iraq. It's for their own good. Dumb me who thought it was about catching the guys who blew up the twin towers in NYC!

Goodness, Kender, you do  have the knack for stepping in it, don't you? 

Posted by WhyNot
3/09/2005 06:45:00 pm  
I mean this as no disrepect, but I have to ask, if we are concerned about the children from this day forward, what do you suggest happen in Iraq to provide for future atability? Given the fact that we can't erase the war, and thatthe country does not have an effective standing army (much like your Lebanese observation), what can be done differently? Isn't it time for people and nations (including my own) to stop bashing the past and start fixing tomorrow? Help train the security forces, help secure the infrastructure and start providing some hope for a better future instead of prediciting it or denouncing it out of hand? 

Posted by The Cranky Liberal
3/09/2005 07:20:00 pm  
I don't take your comment as disrespectful at all, Cranky. But, neither can I pull back on my denunciation of George Bush and the continued occupation of Iraq. We can't erase the war but we can do our best to stop another one and that will be hard to do if we allow the events in Iraq both past and present to be ignored as Mr. Bush and the raging neo-cons would have us do. This man should have been impeached by the American people and these pictures just deepen my feelings on this. I will not unify with this man or his cause which is not about freedom and democracy btw.

There will be no hope for Iraqis as long as the US military is there. The Iraqis themselves will tell you no one is safe in Iraq. Death is a part of life there. Iraqis must live with the US military who will not leave and terrorist, insurgents, freedom fighters also.

There are no discussion points that don't begin with a US withdrawal from Iraq. And of course, Mr. Bush says this is not possible so join with us. Thankfully, France continues to say no and I can continue to hold my head up, at least on this issue. 

Posted by Dianne
3/09/2005 08:03:00 pm  
"what do you suggest happen in Iraq to provide for future atability? "

Very valid question, CL. Here is a suggestion, seing that the near 2 year occupation of Iraq is clearly going nowhere:

1. Pull all the troops out. You know, as in ... "leave the joint".
2. Keep pumping 70 billion dollars per year as aid to Iraq. Same cost as now, and bonus for the US, no more dead GIs. 

Posted by WhyNot
3/09/2005 08:35:00 pm  
Cranky: the past is prologue. If we are unwilling to look at our past we cannot learn from it. I refer you to a small, quite profound little snippet from "The Lion King":

(Rafiki hits Simba on the head)
Simba: "What was that for?"
Rafiki: "It doesn't matter, it's in the past."
Simba: "Yeah, but it still hurts."
Rafiki: "Yes, the past can hurt, but the way I see it, you either run from it, or learn from it. (swings his stick at Simba again who ducks out of the way) Ah! You See? So what are you going to do?"

Cranky, I would wager that if someone bombed your house and killed your child, you would not be so quick to dismiss the lessons of the past. 

Posted by Sarah
3/09/2005 10:48:00 pm  
Well as much as I wish all of our troops home, explain to me how the interim government is going to handle security? Who is going to step in and provide protection? You have just said France won't, the U.N. isn't able to, and the Iraqi government admits it's army isn't ready. So how do we square the circle here? We leave then what? Saves all of the American lives granted, and I'd be happy with that part. Not sure if it saves Iraqi lives in the short term.

The "insurgents" are attacking Iraqi civilian targest with much greater frequency than American military targets. Will they stop if the U.S. leaves? Maybe some will. Why though, if your anger is against the U.S. forces do you target your own population? It seems like an aweful strange way to run a war to free your country doesn't it? So I get back to my question we leave and then what? Do you honestly believe that that alone will make things peaceful and calm?

Ask yourself if your hatred for George Bush hurts him more, or the Iraqi people? I can't stand the man as anyoen who has ever read my site, but by dismissing him you cut yourself out of the discussion to effect change. He IS going to be POTUS for nearly 4 years. So turn away in disdain if you must, but remember you sacrifice your opportunity when you do.

And Sarah, I agree with you, I think the war breeds future terror. I think 9/11 created a country that was ready to take its chances with that fact.  

Posted by The Cranky Liberal
3/10/2005 05:30:00 am  
Not sure if it saves Iraqi lives in the short term ”

Maybe, maybe not. But since when has this been a US gov priority or even concern?

The "insurgents" are attacking Iraqi civilian targest with much greater frequency than American military targets. Will they stop if the U.S. leaves? Maybe some will. Why though, if your anger is against the U.S. forces do you target your own population?

I'd thought the answer was obvious: the US military are armed to the teeth. The Iraqi police forces are sitting ducks. The Iraqi ppl are fed up with the US and anything propped up by them, such as US trained and approved Iraqi forces become as hatefully targeted as the US themselves. Only they are much easier to get.

Have you ever read Riverbend's website? She lives there. She can tell you that US trained and produced Iraqi police have to wear masks so that their neighbors don't recognize them, so great the shame is to be one of them.

So I get back to my question we leave and then what? Do you honestly believe that that alone will make things peaceful and calm?

No, I don't. In fact it's probably going to be a huge mess for sometime. But it is a huge fuckin' mess already, and the longer the US troops stay, the worse it gets. Ppl have had  it. Yes, the US have fucked the place up, the same as the French/Dutch/English/Spanish/Portuguese have all over the world in the past, and if the US gov had half a fuckin' brain, they would learn from other countries' mistakes.

No, there is NO fixing the fuck up. All the US can do if they actually mean to be helpful, is to get the fuck out, leave those ppl sort themselves out, and pump money for a few years as a "sorry we came to fuck you" apology gesture and to help repair the destruction. 

Posted by WhyNot
3/10/2005 06:43:00 am  
"You want to end terrorism? End unjust military occupations. By all means have Syria conduct an orderly withdrawal from Lebanon if that is what the Lebanese public wants. But Israel needs to withdraw from the Golan Heights, which belong to Syria, as well. The Israeli military occupation of Gaza and the West Bank must be ended. The Russian scorched earth policy in Chechnya needs to stop. Some just disposition of the Kashmir issue must be attained, and Indian enormities against Kashmiri Muslims must stop. The US needs to conduct an orderly and complete withdrawal from Iraq. And when all these military occupations end, there is some hope for a vast decrease in terrorism. People need a sense of autonomy and dignity, and occupation produces helplessness and humiliation. Humiliation is what causes terrorism. Juan Cole "

Peace without justice is not and will never be possible, Cranky.

"Ask yourself if your hatred for George Bush hurts him more, or the Iraqi people?"

This is what I frequently get from the neo-cons, Cranky. It's all they have left to attack with when their arguments fall flat.

"by dismissing him you cut yourself out of the discussion to effect change."

It seems our idea of change differs from yours, Cranky and we very well may not be a part of your discussion. We will not lie down with the enemy in order to effect change.



 

Posted by Dianne
3/10/2005 07:08:00 am  
"I think the war breeds future terror. I think 9/11 created a country that was ready to take its chances with that fact. "

Rather than read into your words what may not be there I will ask you a question. Did 9/11 create a country willing to make war on 'anyone' regardless of said countrys involvement with it? Does your 'war on terror' include Osama or has he become a meaningless figure now? If 'war breeds future terror' isn't war terror?  

Posted by Dianne
3/10/2005 07:21:00 am  
Mm. I'm with Cranky on this one, though essientially you guys are talking about the same thing.

No one has forgotten about 9/11 and Osama, Dianne (except maybe Bush and Co.) And no one is planning to lie down with the enemy either.

There is a time and place for everything. There was a time where maybe  it would have been possible to prevent Bush from going into Iraq (maybe because he was pretty determined about it, was there really anything anyone could have done?) There was also a time to talk about Bush's incompetence, and that was last November.

But I think it's time we adressed the situation that his actions (right or wrong, justified or not, timely or otherwise) have created. It's time to look at what can be done, and do it.

And I don't think an immediate withdrawal would really solve that problem. We all want to repair the destruction guys, but pumping money isn't enough. The US can't stay in Iraq anymore, it's sucking the nation dry. But neither can they leave, because as shaky as it is, US intervention is now one of the few things sort of holding the country together.

Again, this isn't about whether or not intervention was better for the Iraqis than Saddam. But NOW, at this moment, if the US pulls out, all hell will break loose (some might argue it has already, and they may very well be right).

Cranky is right, the US are not the only agressors toward the Iraqis. The "insurgents", or "terrorists", are killing many people almost everyday. This isn't agression toward the US anymore, it's something much deeper than that.

If the US pulls out NOW, leaving the country nothing but in shambles, it will come back and bite Americans in the butts. Sorry, but it's true. Insurgents can, and will probably use that bad image to rally the people against America. More people might die.

Iraq does need a proper ruling government. They need to elect their representatives, whomever they will be. If the Iraqis, or at least a decent majority, get to elect a leader of their choice, then maybe it really wouldn't be such a waste of resources. Of lives. I don't know how good the current candidates are in representing the Iraqi people, but at least it will be THEIR choice. Not that of Saddam, and not that of the US. Only then maybe they will be happy, and only then can the US pull out with a lighter heart.

Like I said, I don't know if this was neccessary when the US first sent troops in there, but at this point, given everything that has happened, what else is there to do but finish what they started?

We can't go back and change the things that happened, as much as you all know I want to. That doesn't mean everything is forgiven and forgotten either. At least it shouldn't be.

History is a cruel thing I suppose. It only takes a few decades to wipe the memory of mankind to war, and only a few decades for man to want to go to war again.

And yes, looking back and saying "Oh well, nothing we can do to change what has happened" is the main reason that happens. But not if we think about what we can do NOW.

Remember, we're on the same side!! 

Posted by anna.
3/10/2005 11:53:00 am  
We're on the same side, Anna but the side we're on is not the same.

Before I start my pitch let me thank you profusely for the animated banner. :) It's so much better than my static one.

I discovered Cranky's page some time ago even before he found Ran's site. I visited and commented once, that I know of. I continued to watch his site since we meet in some of the same places but it wasn't long before I saw that although there are area's we can agree on there are area's where we don't. I never brought his site up to WhyNot as an addition to this site because I felt he wasn't left enough economically and I felt he was part of the 'unity/let's make peace' group. This is not in any way to be taken as a criticism. We all have our roles and our places. WhyNot found him at your place, ask me about adding him and with a bit of voiced skepticism I said, "whatever you think." One of WhyNot's finer qualities and he has many is his trust in human nature. I am not so afflicted. I am not letdown as often as he is and I don't have near as many friends. I choose to live with this. I must laugh here and say..most people only think they want to know me better.

Our view and analysis of the world is different. It's not based on what's good for the US or what's good for the US is good for us all.

As one who grew up and lived most of her adult life in the states I know all too well my country and it's mantra. I grew up with nostalgia. I heard it, read it, watched it in old movies on the television. The mantra of 'America is the greatest', 'America is the beacon on the hill', 'Love it or leave it'... I use to belong to all these clubs. I was just as vociferous as I am now. But, as Paul said, when I was a child I spake as a child...

I am tired of the world we have created and if we continue down the same old tired road nothing will change. 20 years from now we will still be fighting wars, destroying the planet or what's left of it. We no doubt will have lost several thousand more animal, bird, fish, plant species, innercity slums will have expanded and of course poverty and disease around the world will continue to stare back at us and ask why.

What we see happening in Iraq today is just a replay of the past. It looks different because of technology. The Ceasar gene is still at work. The conquering legions are still moving upon the earth in all their glory. Who knows one day we may see a United States of the World. I hope not.

I will end here because I'm tired of thinking about it, I have to wash my hair and I'm sure you will get my point. We are on a different plane. We must all follow our heart and do what we do best. Some of us debate and others wield a big stick. We do both here. We're all part of the foodchain. I don't intend to be eaten or let my neighbor be eaten either.

We are not talking about the same thing. On occasion we come together on a point only to be seperated by the finer points.
I'm with Juan Cole on this... 

Posted by Dianne
3/10/2005 03:52:00 pm  
There was also a time to talk about Bush's incompetence, and that was last November. ”

I think the time is the entire  time he's in office. In western democracies, a gov is voted in by the majority of the population (except in the US) and is expected to follow up on the pledges that were the reasons for it to be voted in.

The name of the game in a democracy is not for someone to make it in the election and then thinks he's become king and is no longer answerable to the population till the end of his term - that is not a democracy, but an autocracy, and if we follow that kind of logic and we find ourself with a Hitler, then we would have to say "oh well, we have to wait till he finishes his term".

An elected gov's duty is to reasonably stick to the promises they made their citizens, and if they grossly misbehave, then it is the duty of all citizens to yell out and take to the streets if needed. I can tell you that if Chirac/Raffarin had done one tenth what Bush has, Paris and the whole country would be ablaze and they would no longer be in office.

And it would be only too right.

Need I remind ppl of the quote from Thomas Jefferson about "dissent" and "patriotism"? 

Posted by WhyNot
3/10/2005 06:43:00 pm  
if the US pulls out, all hell will break loose (some might argue it has already, and they may very well be right) ”

That is exactly what I argue. And it's getting worse every day.

the US are not the only agressors toward the Iraqis. The "insurgents", or "terrorists", are killing many people almost everyday. This isn't agression toward the US anymore, it's something much deeper than that

What exactly is that thing  that is much deeper? 

Posted by WhyNot
3/10/2005 09:21:00 pm  

:
:
:

BloggerHacks

<< Home