In just one week in October, a series of bomb scares swept across Germany. Outside of Hannover, 22,000 people were evacuated when three bombs were discovered. A few days later in the same city, a weapons removal squad defused a 500-pound bomb found near the highway. Finally, a highway worker was killed when his cutting machine hit a buried bomb… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (23)Page 1 of 1 pagesActually the main reason the two IDF soldiers were abducted last summer was to get Israel to come into Lebanon and dismantle all
their land mines which kill or maim thousands each year.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 11, 2006 at 4:57 PM The US is one of the foremost users of anti-personal weapons along with Israel. This betrays a strategy of depopulation, colonization, conquest, pacification, and occupation. The efforts to clear certain areas in order to restructure them politically and engage in ethnic cleansing is one reason the US is so dependant on massively destructive weapons that are aimed at populations such as cluster bombs, white phosphorus, napalm, and chemical defoliants.
The US strategy is not based on fighting an organized conventional military enemy to achieve concrete military objectives but is arrayed against populations in order to reorder local societies and establish political control in the aftermath. The destruction and dispersal of Sunnis from the triangle and in order to reduce their population and terrorize them in order to divide the country is a divide and rule tactic. In Afghanistan, there is no clear objective. The Taliban, once US/Pakistan proxies against more pro-Russian (non-Soviet) northern alliance warlords in order to build a pipeline to Pakistan over Afghanistan, are now fighting US/UK forces in the southeast. There is very little aid to the Kabul Regime of Kharzai and most of what is spent is military aid. There can be little success as US military adventurism is beginning to feed on itself and is achieving less and less while the terrorist base in the Middle east and central asia grows. Ultimately US imperialism will bring political and economic chaos.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Dec 12, 2006 at 1:51 AM cabdriver,
There is no question the U.S. uses anti-personnel weapons — in a war your goal is to wound (preferably) or kill the opposition. On what do you base your other comments of what our goals are?
We are not fighting a conventional military enemy. If you think we are genuinely targeting the civilian population I suggest you are not reading a wide enough range of material.
I urge you to read, “Operation Homecoming” sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts to get some first hand info.
If we really set out to destroy the Iraqis we could pull all of our troops and bomb them into oblivion.
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 12, 2006 at 10:57 AM We are targeting the civilian population of necessity because the very nature of this mass murder legalized as war necessitates that.
The NEA was long ago taken over by neocon ideologues going back
to Ronald McDonald. We created the insurgency, we created the
instability, get out ! If not, our troops deserve exactly what they get
and NO I don’t back them anymore than I backed our mass murderers
in Indochina or the Contra scum in Nicaragua. The US is one of the
very few, maybe the only holdout against landmines, I believe that
even the criminal state of Israel has signed on to the treaty.
Bombing is not the only form of destruction. That at this late date anyone
would try to rationalize our policy in Iraq is beyond belief.
Guerrilla warfare is dirty but so is conventional mass murder warfare.
The weaker party of necessity resorts to guerrilla warfare as happened
in Nazi Occupied Europe. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the
gander...............Too bad if we get hung on our own self-righteous Nuremberg petard.
Iraq was NOT a terrorist base before our invasion, WE have made it into
one. We are much less secure than before the neoconmen invaded Iraq and now we are losing the war in Afghanistan, where we have already killed many more civilians than died on 9-11. And NO I don’t
want to bomb the village to save it.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 12, 2006 at 5:48 PM Blondemike, I see you have it all figured out.
Does closing your mind to any other possible scenario make you feel more secure or just smug?
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 13, 2006 at 11:37 AM What other possible scenario are you talking about ? According to
everyone in the world but you the Iraq invasion has been a disaster
totally based on lies and poorly executed. Why would anyone expect
a different outcome than the utter disaster that we see every day in
the papers and tube ?
Posted by blondemike on Dec 13, 2006 at 1:05 PM Blondemike,
OTHER SCENARIOS:Don’t believe everything you see and hear in the papers and on the tube.
(It won’t grow hair and losing weight needs no magic formula.)
You jump to conclude that I do not see the present Iraq situation as disastrous. IMO the war went well the post war is a total flop.You buy into the idea it was all based on lies. Then assume the lies were all from our side.
You claim we are purposely targeting civilians.
You infer that some wars are less “legal” than others, as if we are playing some sport in which penalties are issued to those who disobey the rules.
Oh, I know, there are “The Rules of Engagement.” So who is going to enforce them and how? “If you don’t fight fair I will kill you.” “World opinion” ???You say, “We created the instability.” If you mean Saddam’s stability, OK — I agree. Other than tyrannical stability a la Hitler, Stalin, Tito — but this region has never been stable. If they can’t find a common enemy they simply enjoy killing the next tribe over the dune.
AS for “everyone in the world” here is a suggested reading list. (Better yet talk to as many returning GIs as possible.)
“Cobra ll,” — A recipe for the disaster this has turned out to be. Plans and arrogant assumptions so typical of many CEOs.
“The Crisis of Islam,” — A summary of Middle East/Western relations over time.“Operation Homecoming,” — 100 personal accounts by returning troops and their families
-------------------------
Lies and Intel: Saddam was telling the U.N. he had no WMD and at the same time telling Iran and Shiites in Iraq that he had a bunch.CEOs - Conspiracies or just plain dumb? Remember how some top guy thought a “New Coke” would sell. Currently Macy’s is finding out Marshall Field was more than just a sign on the building.
NEOCON has become a scapegoat for any and all problems as if they were an unfied force. Have you read the Weekly Standard lately? Not much unity from one of the major ones to wear the label.
“It isn’t over til it’s over.” Yogi Berra
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 15, 2006 at 8:40 AM Saddam NEVER had those WMD’s to begin with and I doubt he told Iran that he did. When the Kurds were gassed in that village in 87 or 88 Reagan and the Army War College claimed it was IRAN.
So when were they lying ? Then ? Now ? Probably both.
Modern warfare as of NECESSITY targets civilians, no one’s intentions
matter here, it’s the nature of the warfare.
Spare me your simple minded analysis of the Middle East which lets
the US and Israel off the hook and blames it all on Islam. Thirty years
ago people like you were blaming it all on Nasser and the Reds.
On Israel First & Foremost, the Neocons ARE a unified force. Same
on war with Iran and the lying Iraq wars of 1991 and 2003. Buchanan
had it right about Israel’s Amen Corner running the show here. AIPAC
totally controls Congress. NRA and AARP only wish they had that kind
of leverage. I don’t think we have been in a justified war since 1812
when the Brits burned down the Capitol though Chomsky told me we
started that one too.
No WMDs, no Al Queda link, no 9-11 link, no Iraqi threat to neighbors.
Case closed.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 15, 2006 at 11:02 AM Blondemike,
Well, like I said before, I see you have it all figured out.
I won’t waste any more of your time or mine — feel free to just skip over my comments and go on to someone else’s opinion for your daily rant.
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 15, 2006 at 11:22 AM Ban Cluster Bombs!!!
I would like to ban war altogether but sadly believe that is unlikely in this world.
Maybe in the next world ... but I digress.
It’s good to see the Mennonite Central Committee mentioned in this article.
My church, through it’s centralized organization, MCC, is doing what it can by opposing cluster bombs specifically and violence in general.
Mennonite Central Committee - Cluster Bombs - The Case for A Ban
Mennonite Central Committee Letter to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Dec 15, 2006 at 9:08 PM WTH, the ONLY reason I respond is that I hate to see lies go on unrebutted. I agree that it is a waste of time to try to reason with
you.
David, is it hard writing from that straitjacket ?
Posted by blondemike on Dec 18, 2006 at 11:18 AM David, is it hard writing from that straitjacket ?
Excuse me?
Are you implying something I wrote is crazy?
Or just being rude?If something I wrote is crazy you will have to be more specific and kindly correct me in the error of my way.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Dec 18, 2006 at 11:30 PM Mike, you should take your own advice that you gave to Whattheheck at
White Progressives Don’t Get It.Your response is ad hominem attacks and an utter failure to either present a coherent response ...
Posted by blondemike on Dec 18, 2006 at 10:48 AMI look forward to your coherent response.
I hope that it will not include an abusive ad hominem.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Dec 18, 2006 at 11:37 PM David, I have presented coherent arguments all along. If you want to
pretend that you haven’t read them, should I pretend that I haven’t written them ?
How does one “correct” craziness ?
Posted by blondemike on Dec 19, 2006 at 11:40 AM Mike,
My request for a coherent response was not pertaining to your comments about the topic of cluster bombs and associated tangents. I have read your comments and found them to be coherent and accurate.My request for a coherent response was for clarification of exactly what you think I said that was so crazy as to require a straitjacket and a subsequent request for your proof for this craziness you allege I suffer from. Or, conversely, my request was for an acknowledgement and apology for your insult to my mental health.
How does one “correct” craziness ?
Since we have not even established what comment of mine you allege to be crazy this question is premature.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Dec 19, 2006 at 12:08 PM Ok, David, I owe you an explanation. Over on the God thread I simply
found your comments to be esoteric to the point of absurdity. I was
funning you on the straitjacket comment.
I do not even believe in psychiatry or the concepts of mental illness
and mental health, am one with Tom Szasz in that regard.
Any kind of irony or humor seems to be lost here so I’ll be totally
serious from here on out.
Sorry if you took my comments literally.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 19, 2006 at 5:59 PM Thanks Mike.
I can appreciate irony and humour too but know it is does get lost in the translation sometimes.
Please understand that I knew you were having fun with me, I laughed too, but our recent discussion over on the God thread, thanks to my esoteric mind and your exoteric mind, was becoming frustrating for me as well, so I called you on the straitjacket comment here.
I think the result has been good. We have blown off a little steam and reached a better understanding of one another and maybe I won’t seem so esoteric to you anymore.
Life is too serious to take seriously so please do continue to use humour. Just be a little more careful where you use it. On the God thread there would have been some context to understand your little joke while here on this thread it appeared to be an inflammatory insult to the casual observer.
Thanks again.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Dec 19, 2006 at 6:30 PM I think cluster bombs should be banned. Since they are not, is it presently legal to use them? Why isn’t Hillary jumping on the bandwagon to get the State Departments response?
At any ate, the Iraqis are doing a great job of torturing and killing their own countrymen with their sectarian violence,aka civil war. What’s more, they don’t just do it with suicide bombers, they get up close and personal. Why aren’t the people engaged in this considered “war criminals”? Bodies are so mutilated, they cannot even be identified. This is being done by the Sunnis and the Shi’ites. I wonder if maybe war is hell...oh yeah, I believe it and say it all of the time.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 19, 2006 at 7:23 PM Exactly why we need to get out, Kimberly. The Iraqis were NOT doing
this on a widespread level before we came.
Hillary ???????????? You gotta be kidding, she’s a warmonger.
A million Iraqis perished under her husband’s sanctions.
David, your point’s taken. No problem.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 19, 2006 at 7:43 PM Mike,
It is my understanding that the Iraqis weren’t doing “this” under the regime of Saddam Hussein. He was a strong (oppressive) leader and sectarian violence and/or civil war would not have been tolerated. We aren’t in Darfur and look what is happening. As soon as we pull out of Iraq, the violence the Iraqis are doing to each other will not stop. It won’t stop until one side’s religious views are the majority in power. It will be a bloody battle until the end.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 19, 2006 at 9:12 PM Since they were NOT killing each other on the scale they are now before our invasion, our departure could only help. Hussein kept a lid on real tight like Tito did in Yugoslavia and as soon as freedom comes (so-called) we get genocide. And don’t get us in Darfur which is far from the worst situation in Africa now, over five MILLION people have been killed in Congo (Zaire) violence in just the last few years where we were involved for decades propping up Mobutu. Not to mention our totally unconstructive role in Israel/Palestine.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 20, 2006 at 12:01 PM the only thing i could focus on was that they dropped 1 million bombs in the last 72 hours. the strategy fits into the whole ethnic cleansing/correcting by mass suffering. doesn’t this counter the lessons of judaism and the holocaust.
Posted by VikiBabu on Jan 6, 2007 at 3:07 PM Hi Viki,
doesn’t this counter the lessons
I think it does. Seems like never again was just words.
Posted by David in Canuckistan on Jan 8, 2007 at 10:23 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Frida Berrigan
- 5 Minutes to Nuclear Midnight
- The Fog of War Crimes
Who's to blame when 'just following orders' means murder? - What We Leave Behind
From Kosovo to Lebanon, cluster bomb casualties continue to mount - Lawyers Fight for Habeas Rights
The Military Commissions Act suspends Habeas corpus for foreign citizens accused of hostilities against the U.S. - Halliburton Hearts Congress
Do partisanship and cronyism trump congressional oversight and corporate accountability? - Walking to Guantnamo
Peace marchers aim to keep the abuse of 'enemy combatants' visible
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
