Iraq in Hell

I've been watching some documentaries by John Pilger lately; if you've seen a few British docus, you've probably seen him or at least heard his voice.

Today's selection: 2003's "Breaking the silence - Truth and lies in the war on terror."

Here's the moment where you just have to watch and imagine this has nothing to do with you. Pilger is speaking with Undersecretaries of Defense Douglas Feith and John Bolton (individually, but they're editied together).

JP: Why is it wrong for dictators and terrorists to kill innocent civilians, and right - or excusable - for the United States to do exactly the same?

DF: Well, the United States doesn't do it, and if we did it it would be as reprehensible as the terrorists.

JP: The United States doesn't kill innocent civilians?

DF: Uh, NO, the United States doesn't target civilians.

JP: Hm... Those of us on the outside who look at September the 11th, where 3,000 people died in that tragedy, but then look at the thousands who've died since, wonder about double standards, here. Would you address that?

DF: I think that the um ... I think that the numbers you're talking about are are are questionable, but let's leave aside your numbers but -

JP: Why are they questionable?

DF: I don't accept your assertion that we've killed thousands of uh uh innocent people, but let me give it to you -

JP: There's a lot of studies, and examination of facts on the ground that suggest indeed thousands; I mean in Iraq at the moment, there are studies that are talking about 10,000, but I don't want to get into numbers, but certainly "thousands" seems a fair figure.

DF: I uh I uh don't know that that's true. And I don't accept the assertion.

(Switch to walrus-man John Bolton:)

JB: Well I think that Americans like most people are mostly concerned about their own countrymen. I don't know how many Iraqi civilians were killed but I can assure you that the numbers, that the absolute minimal that it's possible in modern warfare. One of the stunning things about the quick coalition victory is how little damage was done to Iraqi infrastructure, and how low Iraqi casualties were.

JP: Well that's quite high, if it's 10,000 civilians.

JB: Well I think that it's quite low if you look at the size of the military operation that was undertaken.

(Switch back to Feith:)

DF: It's practically an inevitability in war that there are going to be innocent people that get hurt no matter how much care a professional military, a properly-behaved military, puts into avoiding damage into non-combatants and into civilian infrastructure.

(Pilger stares at Feith over the top rims of his glasses.)

JP: Mr. Feith, that sounds fine, sitting here in Washington. But in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, which is my most recent experience, that's not how it looks at all -

Unknown military representative, off-screen: May I interrupt for a moment, I apologize sir, would you stop tape please for one moment?

Unknown: Thank you very much, let me know when you've stopped tape.

JP: Excuse me -

Unknown: I'm sorry I'm doing this purposefully, sir, have we stopped tape?

JP: Are you serious?

Unknown: I was not under the impression, sir...

(end of interview)

That was seven years ago. Today, Iraq Body Count (which only counts civilians that are reported in English-language/translated newspapers and television) has documented figures of 98,585 - 107,594 "civilian deaths from violence" since the start of the war. Counts that take more into account have wildly ranging estimates that top even a million deaths.

Sunday (two days ago, Halloween) was massive, with 64 civilians dying, most of them in an attack on a church. Earlier today (Tuesday, 11/2/2010) there was a series of coordinated bombings in Shi'ite neighborhoods across Baghdad, killing at least 117 (and wounding 322) more.

(FYI: Numbers of civilians killed in Afghanistan range from 8,991 - 28,583, though reporting has been even more scattered than in Iraq.)

Why? is a useless question at this point.

When I read this on CNN's front page just now:

Bomber hits as Iraqis celebrate soccer win
A bomber detonated her suicide vest Saturday in a marketplace in Diyala province, targeting soccer fans who had just watched the Iraqi national team win a big match against China, authorities told CNN.

without even thinking about it, I put my head in my hands and whimpered "Nooooooo...." My response struck me as perhaps melodramatic, but, there it was nonetheless.

It's odd and maybe interesting to me, that this stands out as being one of my most immediate reactions to any of the shitty news coming out from Iraq in a long time. It's like... people get to enjoy a simple pleasure during all of this chaos, this Hell, and then some poor, misguided person is so far gone as to think that doing this will mean something. Instead, it's a perfect example of how meaningless life, reason, reality, has become for some of these people. Senselessness makes sense, I guess. Fuck.

Radioactive Man

From Inter Press service, via Common Dreams (which everyone should always read):

‘Special Weapons’ Have a Fallout on Babies

FALLUJAH - Babies born in Fallujah are showing illnesses and deformities on a scale never seen before, doctors and residents say.

The new cases, and the number of deaths among children, have risen after “special weaponry” was used in the two massive bombing campaigns in Fallujah in 2004.

After denying it at first, the Pentagon admitted in November 2005 that white phosphorous, a restricted incendiary weapon, was used a year earlier in Fallujah.

In addition, depleted uranium (DU) munitions, which contain low-level radioactive waste, were used heavily in Fallujah. The Pentagon admits to having used 1,200 tonnes of DU in Iraq thus far.

Many doctors believe DU to be the cause of a severe increase in the incidence of cancer in Iraq, as well as among U.S. veterans who served in the 1991 Gulf War and through the current occupation.

“We saw all the colours of the rainbow coming out of the exploding American shells and missiles,” Ali Sarhan, a 50-year-old teacher who lived through the two U.S. sieges of 2004 told IPS. “I saw bodies that turned into bones and coal right after they were exposed to bombs that we learned later to be phosphorus.

"We" have actually been dropping depleted uranium bombs ever since the Gulf War, and not just during it, and during these past years. All through the 90s these munitions were being dumped in payloads by our forces. The worst of the effects had been felt in the Basra area, which was the main area of activity in the original war. Before this war even started, people there had been dealing with a massive increase in cancer, to a point where 40% of the population was plagued by it. Deformities in newborns were common.

Some people consider the "Gulf War syndrome" that so many of our military experienced was a result of the DU munitions used (in addition to such factors as post-traumatic stress disorder, which will make any condition worse). I'd be really interested to see a study regarding women that served on the ground in Basra back then, and if they experienced particular difficulties when giving birth, or if there were deformities in their children. And in general, the cancer rate for those that served in the area at that time.

Of course, the radiation issued from the remains of the munitions will never go away... it's there to stay. Just like freedom!

---

Ah! I just looked up DU on Wiki, and it actually addresses the lasting effects of DU on US military: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Gulf_War_syndrome_and_soldier_complaints