Pictures from Iraq

Former Member

I found this link earlier today, its a series of profound and powerful photos taken by a US soldier serving in Iraq. (Not really for the squeamish)

I think its gonna take a while for me to get them out of my mind.

Former Member

Originally posted by ~*STRESSED*~
They are awful:(

Why can't we have a world without violence?

<sigh>

I know, they really shocked me. You don't see pictures like that in the daily newspapers for sure.

Former Member

Originally posted by ~*STRESSED*~
They are awful:(

Why can't we have a world without violence?

<sigh>

Because then the affluent would have less power and money. I doubt it'll happen.

Former Member

I wouldnt say them pictures was hardcore that is just how war is.

Saying that though the one with the mother hanging onto her children in that trench got me thinking.

Former Member

It was the small boy, whose face was covered in chem burns that really got me the most. I think this soldier could definately go into a photo journalism career.

Former Member

Originally posted by lukesh
exactly. thats what war is, can't expect to see no deaths.

So then you should have no objection to people seeing coffins returning home should you?

Former Member

Why, they live above massive oil reserves of course.

They only have themselves to blame, really.

Former Member

that really made me think. theres a difference between 'innocents killed and wounded' as a headline in the newspaper, and seeing pictures like these. a big difference. the source of conflict is the struggle for power. everyone wants to be the big boss and its people like these who are only statistics to them. saddam and dubya are both responsible.

Former Member

Does it get any more deliberate than dropping 50,000 tonnes of high explosives over a sovereign nation?

Former Member

Well go and examine more than the pro-war spin and you might realise that much of what saddam is accused of is simply an exercise in double standards by those who had every intention from the start to wage a war and simply needed to manipulate public opinion sufficiently to avoid the political backlash.

The vast majority of those deaths accredited to Saddam were, by our own repeated standard (and in fact your own as demonstrated in your previous post), "collateral damage" during the Iran_ Iraq war which Saddam only fought at the insistance of and with the full backing of Washington. Cannot villify Saddam without dragging his US handlers to court for crimes against humanity as well.

Further deaths ascribed to him stem from the uprising of the Shias which, once again, came about through the direct pledge of Bush Sr. to provide all material support (which he subsequently decided not to do). As we ourselves are currently brutally suppressing the very same community, once again we have no moral or ethical platform from which to judge Saddam for doing the very same.

If you were to incite an uprising in your area, youd better believe that even in our democratic western societies, you'd be violently put down or killed to re-established order and control.

Does any of this excuse Saddam? NO. He was a brutal dictator, but as brutal dictators go he is no worse nor better than any other. As world leaders go, including what we "free and democratic people" routinely display to the world in terms of unrestrained militancy, he is also par for the course.

Former Member

I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but I actually agree with most of what Clandeatine has said there.

If you think that the US wouldn't "put down" a protest, all you need to do is look up Kent University...

As for the pictures, what did you expect? There is a cost to war and for those individuals it's probably considered a cost too high. For the majority of the population, they are still [apparently] grateful to have been liberated from the clutches of Saddam...

Former Member

That's true MoK, most ARE glad to be rid of Saddam. That, however, does not equate to a similar majority accord with the continued US occupation nor does it equate to their acceptance of the dictats by their supposed "liberators" as to whom or by what model they may be "permitted" to be governed.

Our continued grasping for control and our media's continued labelling of normal Iraqis who dare to resist our occupation (as they rightly should) as "terrorists" is undoing any good the present administration may have naiively thought we would be hailed for.

I for one feel no better about the thought of average civilians having their cities bombed in "response" to their resistance simply because it has the stars and stripes flying above it all. If it was wrong for Saddam, it is wrong for us as well and we would do well to leave them to rebuild their own futures as THEY see fit.

Former Member

Originally posted by dave_oliver
You don't see pictures like that in the daily newspapers for sure.

You say you live in Spain, just buy a Spanish newspaper and you'll see the reality of war. I bought El País on the 12th of March and the first photo I saw inside was the top half of a burned woman hanging out one of the windows of the train. And just outside the train you could see a leg or an arm, I don't know.

The Spanish Press have been showing this type of photos since the war started, and other wars or "conflicts", and any terrorist act in the Middle East or in Spain itself. That is why over 90% of Spain is against the war, and that is why there are gigantic demonstrations after terroristst attacks. And not only in Spain, after the IRA attack that killed 27, (that was a long time ago), there were big demonstartions asking for peace in Ireland, I went to the one in Madrid.

And another thing, the photo page you sent is called Some Picture a friend brought back from Iraq, these photos weren't taken by the same person... and this one is spectacular: