Wednesday, April 07, 2010



I’m loving all the carefully thought out and nuanced positions people are taking regarding the video released by Wikileaks showing U.S. soldiers murdering people in Iraq. There is no nuanced position, clearly war is wrong and what the soldiers did was wrong. There is nothing else to say about it, there are no mitigating circumstances. Those soldiers have no business being in Iraq therefore even if the murdered Iraqi were carrying weapons in each hand and hand grenades on their belts American troops have no business shooting people in Iraq. That’s fairly simple and I would think even a moron could understand it. But there you go.

Let’s take it one step further, even if the people that were murdered were shooting nuclear tipped warheads at the helicopter Americans have no business shooting people in Iraq because they shouldn’t be there in the first place. The one fact being denied in all this nuancing is that American troops shouldn’t be in Iraq at all. Period. The End.


Jonathan Schwarz hits the nail on the head in a brilliant post on this topic.

Here's my prediction for the final outcome of the Wikileaks video: the U.S. military will continue to claim some of the people killed were armed insurgents. This will satisfy all U.S. conservatives and most U.S. "liberals." Meanwhile, everyone else on this planet will continue to gape at us in slack-jawed horror.

Read the rest.


At April 07, 2010 5:00 PM, Blogger Ethan said...

Right fucking on.

At April 07, 2010 5:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What Ethan said.

At April 08, 2010 3:53 AM, Blogger Mimi said...


At April 08, 2010 7:17 PM, Anonymous fuck blogger said...

I guess I need to leave a really brief comment, and avoid nuance then.

OK, I kid. But it occurs to me that one of the other things not being discussed is whether or not the "rules of engagement" were part of the problem. I haven't seen anybody in the popular press("MSM") touch upon the idea that there's something wrong, for one example, with shooting people who are collecting the dead and wounded.

I suggested that differences in race and religion had an effect on US soldiers' behavior at a recent ATR comment thread, but nobody else seemed interested in this, apart from John Caruso who touched upon it indirectly in the main body of the post(although I suppose the regulars may have felt 'talked out' on race from a previous comment thread).

At April 08, 2010 7:20 PM, Anonymous no really, f*** blogger said...

No, actually it's me, but Blogger isn't taking my info so I'm ticked off. I hope my account hasn't been hacked. JaY vEe

At April 08, 2010 7:23 PM, Blogger Jack Crow said...


I think the RoE changed quite a bit:

So much so, according to soldiers on the ground, that it really just amounted to "kill Hajjis."

h/t jenny @ political anxiety.

~ Jack

At April 08, 2010 8:48 PM, Blogger rob payne said...

I suggested that differences in race and religion had an effect on US soldiers' behavior

I would agree with that, in fact the entire war on terror is a war against Muslims and I have always felt that racism is a strong factor in western attitudes toward these wars. But that only makes it all the more disgusting.


Post a Comment

<< Home