Human Shields (What are they thinking?)

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2014
<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/news/878871.asp?0na=x2347381-"; target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.com/news/878871.asp?0na=x2347381-</a>



It seems that a lot of antiwar activists have purposely moved into Baghdad in the hopes of preventing collateral damage to civilians. They have attached themselves to power plants, factories, water purification plants, etc...



As one stated:



Quote:

?I want the world to know there?s no such thing as collateral damage,? said O?Keefe after activists had set down their backpacks and bedrolls on metal beds laid out dormitory style in a plush conference room featuring at least a dozen likenesses of Saddam Hussein. ?If anyone here dies due to bombing, it?s murder.?



Is this guy out of his mind? If anyone dies there it is not murder, it is suicide! Power plants, factories and such are legitimate targets in military exercises as you need to remove from your enemy any advantage so that they will surrender faster.



I think this last quote shows that many have realized their mistake all to late:



Quote:

Some of the shields seemed to be just now waking up to the complex issues?and the risks?swirling about them. ?I?m trying to meet with [U.N. weapons inspectors] to make sure the sites we?re stationed at aren?t close to legitimate military targets,? says one Western peacenik on condition of anonymity. Both the Baghdad South power plant and the Daurra refinery are close to military sites or VIP palaces, and ?a handful? of shields were beginning to worry they?d be forced to stay in places where they didn?t want to be, he said. ?There?s a rumor going around that when we want to leave Iraq, some might not be allowed to.? At least for now, Iraqi authorities show no sign of adopting such tactics. More likely, they?ll reap the propaganda windfall that the human shields represent?then send them home if they?re no longer useful.



Sad. I realize that they are trying to fight the war and prevent it from happening. But if they die when this all goes down their blood will be on their own heads. I will not feel guilty for them, only sadness. It is called personal responsibility, and hopefully they realized the danger they were putting themselves in before they signed up. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
«13456723

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 449
    more deaths will not add anything to this...i don't support human shields....hell, if they want to be shields, find the hospitals and orphanages and elementary schools.....g
  • Reply 2 of 449
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,261member
    I'm hoping for a "Stupid Human Sheild" feature at rotten.com later this year.



    Go retards!
  • Reply 3 of 449
    On this issue I agree with the pro-war crowd.



    In Iraq you have absolutly no control on how you are being used. How do you know that the powerplant you are put in front haven´t got a shelter for the elite in its basement? The critisism against the demonstrators of being useful idiots only applies to these human shields.
  • Reply 4 of 449
    stunnedstunned Posts: 1,096member
    There are much better ways to protest against the war... <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
  • Reply 5 of 449
    pfflampfflam Posts: 5,053member
    They will have a rude awakening when the Iraqis prove to be not as nice as they assumed and as soon as the firing starts they will either be shot or forced into territory where they are certain to be killed, once they are killed then it will be used as press fodder for Hussains PR attempts . . .



    Its so obviouse only a total Eugene Oregon style ultra-lefty wouldn't see it
  • Reply 6 of 449
    Human shields, what a waste of time, life and effort. The US government is even thinking about classifying them as "enemy combatants", and if they even make it home, they could get up to 20 years in jail and a $500,000 fine. What a dumb, stupid way of protesting a war. If it comes to that, those bombs are going to fall, human shields or not. The military, no matter what side they are on don't give a flying fvck if some 'human shield" civilians are hanging out on the ground somewhere below.



    Forget good intentions here...the notion of human shields is totally stupid and unproductive.



    As an afterthought...the only way a "human shield" could work, is en masse, like one of the huge demonstrations of Feb 15... say, a half million people or more going to Iraq. Even then, I am not too sure if it would make much difference, knowing the recklessness, singlemindedness and fear of losing face of both Saddam and Bush....



    <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />



    [ 02-28-2003: Message edited by: Samantha Joanne Ollendale ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 449
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    You know what's funny is that the first set of "human shields" from the first war were in fact prisoners that Iraq held illegally and put in harms way against their will. This is the type of government these "anti-war" protesters want to protect.
  • Reply 8 of 449
    Scott: Just remember that these people are a small fraction of the anti-war movement.



    Just like there is people who wants to nuke the hell out of Iraq on the pro-war side.
  • Reply 9 of 449
    [quote]Originally posted by Anders the White:

    <strong>Scott: Just remember that these people are a small fraction of the anti-war movement.



    Just like there is people who wants to nuke the hell out of Iraq on the pro-war side.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    The last figure I heard was approx. 300 human shields in Iraq. It is unknown how many people are in the anti-war movement. An unknown percentage of them (some 15 million people) hit the streets on Feb 15th. But 300 out of 15 million = 0.002%, kinda insignificant.
  • Reply 10 of 449
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Might as well just stroll off a cliff for all the good it will do.
  • Reply 11 of 449
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    [quote]Originally posted by Scott:

    <strong>You know what's funny is that the first set of "human shields" from the first war were in fact prisoners that Iraq held illegally and put in harms way against their will. This is the type of government these "anti-war" protesters want to protect.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Scott,



    There are well meaning but really ineffective and childish people in every group er...... they don't appear to have a grip on reality ah......they want to do good but end up undermining their cause er...... their hearts in the right place but they appear angry and stupid ah........well you know what I mean.







    [ 03-01-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
  • Reply 12 of 449
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Sigh. I mean all of the "anti-war" people. Not just the useful idiot which are of course in the minority.
  • Reply 13 of 449
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    [quote]Originally posted by Scott:

    <strong>Sigh. I mean all of the "anti-war" people. Not just the useful idiot which are of course in the minority.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Whoosh! Right over the top.





    <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
  • Reply 14 of 449
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    The more the merrier I say. I'd like to see Alec Baldwin, Sean Penn and Bahbrah chained together to protect a Baby Milk Factory.



    Steady that aim, soldier, and take your time about it.
  • Reply 15 of 449
    [quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:

    <strong>



    As an afterthought...the only way a "human shield" could work, is en masse, like one of the huge demonstrations of Feb 15... say, a half million people or more going to Iraq. Even then, I am not too sure if it would make much difference, knowing the recklessness, singlemindedness and fear of losing face of both Saddam and Bush....</strong><hr></blockquote>



    See that would be a great idea. But when they got to Iraq instead of saying "Show us where to sit" to the nearest Iraqi officer they should start hand out pamflets against Saddam, go to the palaces and sites that are assumed having WoMD and sniff around. And always in groups of 100.000. Lets see how Saddam would react to that behaviour among his guests. I don´t think it takes more than 1/2 mill. to start a revolution. And US wouldn´t dare attack as long as 1/2 mill. western people were in Baghdad doing anti-saddam propaganda.



    It would be even better if it was iraqis who did this and the only thing against it would be the huge loss of lifes that it would result in.



    [ 03-01-2003: Message edited by: Anders the White ]</p>
  • Reply 16 of 449
    finboyfinboy Posts: 383member
    [quote]Originally posted by thegelding:

    <strong>more deaths will not add anything to this...i don't support human shields....hell, if they want to be shields, find the hospitals and orphanages and elementary schools.....g</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Agreed.



    Acting as a human shield for military and/or non-humanitarian sites is a war crime. Not because I say so, or because I think it's stupid -- it's an actual war crime under international law.
  • Reply 17 of 449
    finboyfinboy Posts: 383member
    [quote]Originally posted by Anders the White:

    <strong>On this issue I agree with the pro-war crowd.



    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    There is no pro-war crowd. Please be more careful with your choice of words. I know you didn't mean it to be taken that way.



    [ 03-01-2003: Message edited by: finboy ]</p>
  • Reply 18 of 449
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    There's some talk of the Dali Lama & the Pope getting together to make a human shield. I guess they were/are seriously thinking about it. If the Pope were there, the idea of a human sheild starts the become clearer. I doubt Bush would be willing to murder the Pope.



    Hell, if the 15,000,000 protesters all made their way to Iraq the human shield would work as well.



    As for personal responsibility, why is there none for the military? I mean, when we bomb a wedding party in Afghanistan, it's just 'oops'? If we 'accidentally' bomb an illegitimate target and kill some protesters, what responsibility does the military share in your mind? None?
  • Reply 19 of 449
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    [quote]Originally posted by finboy:

    <strong>There is no pro-war crowd.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    There is no spoon...
  • Reply 20 of 449
    Off you go Bunge, you must protect Saddam and his regime now. as someone else stated , it wouldn't be murder, but suicide.
Sign In or Register to comment.