Notes on the War
Published March 25, 2003
Thoughts on the first week of Operation Iraqi Freedom
My blog is not now, nor has it ever been, a pure "warblog." By contrast, I cover all sorts of cultural absurdity, from sports to "The Real World" to transsexual rabbis to pro wrestling. While I do write quite a bit on politics, current events, and "the situation," I'm not writing with any type of ideological axe to grind- and while I'm pretty solidly in the pro-war camp, I'm just as aware of (and repulsed by) many of the actions of the pro-war side as of those on the anti-war side.
I may have gagged at the excesses of Michael Moore last night, but he's not any more loathsome than your average caller to Michael Savage or Sean Hannity (or, for that matter, Savage and Hannity themselves). And while I don't question that what America is doing right now is the right thing, that doesn't mean I'm not nervous or uncertain about what the future holds. In the meantime, a few thoughts on the first week or so of the war in Iraq, from the homefront of Hoboken:
-The war, from what I've seen, seems to be going reasonably well, the last couple days of setbacks notwithstanding (if I see the word "quagmire" in the New York Times at any point before the war is a month old, I will march up to 43rd St. and personally bitchslap Howell Raines). Some of the Iraqi tactics have underscored, for anyone who doubted it, just how savage Saddam's regime is, from the shooting of POWs on camera to the surrender/ambush (the most underhanded, brutal doublecross since Beecher bit off part of Robson's manhood mid-BJ on "Oz"). The sight of Iraqis greeting American soldiers and tearing down the pictures of Saddam was beautiful, akin to Afghan women tearing off their burqas in 2001. That's more than just good PR- it's real liberation. And if this cache of chemical weapons we found is for real, it really says a lot that US troops found something in five days that Hans Blix missed for three months. Saddest of all, I think, was the GI who turned against his own men and tried to blow them up with a grenade. Not only does this show us that we can't necessarily trust our own men, but after this it doesn't look good for the chances of Muslims being able to enlist to defend their country in future wars.
- Notes on the War
- Published: March 25, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Writer: Stephen Silver
- Stephen Silver's BC Writer page
- Stephen Silver's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/4064)
That's a pretty fair essay. I'm an antiwar protestor; we have different views of this war, but I appreciate your respect for my right to express my opinions. Seems there are fewer and fewer free-speech proponents every day.
From the fact-checking department: Iraqi forces did not shoot POWs on camera and broadcast that material. That's either misinformation or disinformation, depending on your intent. They did broadcast footage of dead US soldiers; some had been shot in the head. Whether they were killed in combat or executed as POWs is not known. The speculation that they were executed comes from the fact that they were shot in the head. Execution is one possible explanation for this. Another explanation is that US soldiers wear body armor. Iraqi snipers probably know this and realize that a headshot -- aimed under the Kevlar helmet -- is the only way to get a confirmed kill. We do not know that Iraq is executing POWs.