Keep on bringin’ ‘em on
Matt over at Today in Iraq commemorates the second anniverary of George Bush’s wildly successful incitement to violence, “bring ‘em on”.
Be warned that some of the accompanying photographs are extremely difficult to look at. You probably shouldn’t look at them at work and definitely not if there are children around.
The Western media has done an excellent job of keeping us isolated from the true horror of what goes on in Iraq on a daily basis. That is the function that our mainstream media, from the BBC down, peform for our betters. Being free of the horror allows us to support, or at least be apathetic about, what has gone on in Iraq since the invasion.
If you supported the war then I’d say you’re dutybound to look at the photos – this is what humanitarian intervention looks like when carried out by the likes of our leaders. Oxymoron, anybody?
If you were against the war I’d you also need to see what we walked away from after one day of marching and saying “not in my name.”
Posted on July 4th, 2005 at 6:29pm under Uncategorized
| Related posts... • Napalm: Making it stick • A ‘new’ politics #4 • Rachel from north London: Back on the pesky internet |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 5 Comments |
Thanks for the Link Justin.
Getting a touch hysterical in your old age, ChickYog!
“If you supported the war then I’d say you’re dutybound to look at the photos – this is what humanitarian intervention looks like when carried out by the likes of our leaders. Oxymoron, anybody?”
Well, I looked, and I still support the war. Those pics look just like any war, from anywhere, anytime, and from either side. Perhaps it might cheer you up to have another look at those villagers Saddam gassed a few years back, or perhaps a peek at the pics inside his, and his son’s, torture chambers? Or how about those photos of sick children in hospitals without drugs because he and his henchmen stole the oil for food and medicine money?
By all means be anti-war, but using war pornography to peddle your case simply diminishes it.
Duff, a beer you drink lots of it.
David: You know: I almost used the word pornography myself in the original post.
To a certain extent, I agree with you when you describe the photos as pornography. Looking at them involves the same dislocation of reality as is needed when looking at a picture of a pneumatic blonde with a fist pushed into her anus. Is that real? How is it possible?
It takes an effort of will to make yourself see that it *is* real. Hell, in an age of ever-more realistic screen violence how could we be any different? I went to see what was ostensibly a children’s film last week in which one of the main characters has his legs chopped off and is left to burn almost to death in a volcano. The picture of an Iraqi man’s severed head could be a very good special effect.
This is no slight to Matt. I linked to these pictures not to tittilate in anyway but to demonstrate my disgust. I refuse to believe Matt showed them for any other reason either.
We’ve been round and round on this, you and I, and I doubt we’re ever likely to reach a consensus.
I have a naive and an almost certainly childish view of what’s right and wrong which you and others probably snigger at. The world often works in ways I don’t understand. I have two young daughters and it doesn’t take a huge effort of imagination to project their faces on to those of the children in those pictures – it’s called empathy.
I have looked at the photos of Halabja – it’s one of Saddam’s greatest crimes. That’s why I’m incensed at stories of the use of napalm, depleted uranium and cluster bombing by a liberating army.
I’ve read the accounts of what went on in Saddam’s jails. That’s why I’m incensed at the stories of young boys being sodomised in Abu Ghraib by a liberating army. Or the stories of prisoners being knee-capped with electric drills by the agents of this so-called beacon of democracy we’ve installed.
If some of the surveys conducted into the numbers of casualties since the invasion are anywhere near accurate then we’ve killed as many people in two years as Saddam did in ten.
This new orthodoxy of “humanitarian intervention” (not a concept I know you have much truck with) sounds all very peachy on paper but in practice it’s proving to be, in my opinion, a nightmare. If our leaders are going to sell these wars of plunder as humanitarian causes they should try and conduct them with a little humanity.
I also believe that, for or against, we should be looking at what our leaders are doing on our behalf. In what other aspect of life are we allowed to walk away from the consequences of our actions?
Wo de ma.