An Empty Village
By Mitch Berg
Michael Yon reports from an Iraqi village that was apparently the victim of an Al Quaeda mass murder:
I told the Iraqi commander, Captain Baker, that it was important that Americans see this; he took me around the graves and showed more than I wanted to see. He said the people had been murdered by al Qaeda. I made video of him speaking, and of the horrible scene. The heat and stench were crushingly oppressive and broken only by the sounds of shovels as Iraqi soldiers kept digging.
Yon’s piece is a pictorial, and not for the squeamish.
Hm. Maybe if the villagers had been the subject of a stupid giggly photodocumentary by US troops (but were alive today), the US mainstream media would cover the story.
July 3rd, 2007 at 6:37 am
I agree with you, Mitch. It’s a shame the administration is too incompetent to guarantee even the most rudimentary level of safety after four years in Iraq.
July 3rd, 2007 at 7:35 am
AC, name a country that CAN guarantee a rudimentary level of safety. Mind you, GUARANTEE.
July 3rd, 2007 at 7:42 am
AC you trolling fool. You can look (you did look didn’t you) at the barbarism of the Al Qaeda. A soulless violence that make Lt. Calley look like Mother Teresa and blame anyone but THOSE WHO ACTUALLY DID IT. I’m going to stop now, I don’t want to get any more worked up, not for your sake but for Mitch’s.
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:10 am
Bill – you killed them. When you invade and occupy a country you have to accept responsibility for what happens to the people of that country. The simple truth is that 100,000s of Iraqis are dead because the U.S. invaded their country. Without you, George Bush, and other Republicans they would be alive today.
Republicans have no right to weep over one small group of dead Iraqis, while at the same time you at best ignore and at worst celebrate the deaths of 100,000s of other innocent Iraqi civilians.
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:27 am
*ahem*
“RickDFL- you killed them. When you allow dictators to occupy a country you have to accept responsibility for what happens to the people of that country. The simple truth is that 100,000s of Iraqis are dead because the U.S. sat idly by while Saddam and his regime ran their country. Without you, Bill Clinton, and other Democrats they would be alive today.
Democrats have no right to weep over one small group of dead Iraqis, while at the same time you at best ignore and at worst celebrate the deaths of 100,000s of other innocent Iraqi civilians.”
See how easy it is to play that game?
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:51 am
Heck, leave aside Iraq, by RickDFL’s logic we can blame the entire Vietnam War and its aftermath on the Donkeys! And he just claimed full ownership by his illogic.
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:52 am
People who shoot to gun that kills, that swing the machete that beheads are guilty. When you assign blame to others, i.e., “We’re all guilty” you excuse the actual murderers, and THAT is breathtakingly evil.
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:53 am
PIMF, “shoot to gun” should be “shoot the gun”
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:05 am
Celebrate? That’s an ugly little world you inhabit, Rick.
July 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 am
Were they really killed by Al Qaeda?
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/23/al_qaeda/
Yon mentions “Al Qaeda” 17 times in this piece. He cites no evidence as to how it was ascertained that Al Qaeda perpetrated this barbarism. There is missing context. Why were these villagers slaughtered? Were they Sunni? Shi’ite? Yon’s piece offers no answers or even speculation. It was simply “Al Qaeda.”
From a caption in Yon’s piece: “Al Qaeda slaughters families everywhere: as these graves were being unearthed, more bombs were found in London.”
See, Al Qaeda is everywhere, and that’s why we have to win in Iraq!
Circuitous logic.
From smart commenter “Conscience,” on Yon’s piece:
“Al Qaeda is ruthless, terrible, and should be pursued without mercy. This article tells us what we already know.
“However, it is important to remember that Al Qaeda makes up 5-7% of the Iraqi insurgency, and that most of the killing of American soldiers is being done by Sunni and Shi’ite Iraq warlords and their militias who are jockeying for a bigger piece in their national power vacuum while pushing back against our American soldiers who they view as Occupiers.
“So, please don’t assume that all the violence in Iraq is perpetrated by Al Qaeda, and also remember that Saddam was a secular leader who saw these religious extremists as a threat to his own stability and thus repelled them accordingly. Al Qaeda didn’t appear in Iraq until we arrived.
“And finally, remember this most of all — each Iraqi that dies in this war has a family, friends, and a network of associates that will be affected by his/hers death. Who are they going to blame? — us, and they will swell the ranks of extremists”
July 3rd, 2007 at 11:43 am
Col. Cathcart prattled: “AC, name a country that CAN guarantee a rudimentary level of safety. Mind you, GUARANTEE.”
I think the Iraquis would happily settle for Detroit- or Newark-level violence , Cathcart. Bush made himself the sheriff of Iraq but the guys with the black hats are in control. And it’s getting worse, not better.
The fact that al Qaeda are savages, you great half-wit billhedrick, isn’t news to Angryclown. The only way you wingnuts think you can duck blame for the mess you created in Iraq, through lies and incompetence, is to hide behind al Qaeda’s barbarism.
July 3rd, 2007 at 11:58 am
“I think the Iraquis would happily settle. . .”
Just say you can’t name name a country that can guarantee safety, AC, as per your original statement. A clown can admit to being silly, dontcha know?
July 3rd, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Blofeld-
You quote an incoherent argument written as an anonymous comment to an opinion piece by an anti-war columnist.
This is supposed to provide the ‘context’ missing in Yon’s post about atrocities committed by anti-US forces in Iraq?
July 3rd, 2007 at 12:15 pm
AC asserts:
“And it’s getting worse, not better.”
Care to back that up with evidence AC? Not that you usually do.
July 3rd, 2007 at 12:39 pm
It just HAS to be getting worse, Chad. Otherwise how can yoou justify extreme cynicism like “See, Al Qaeda is everywhere, and that’s why we have to win in Iraq!”
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:32 pm
“Anti-US forces in Iraq?” You’re supposed to call them Al Qaeda, Terry! Fall in line!
Terry, I’m pointing out the implications of the missing context. Yon’s reporting should tell the known facts on who committed this massacre and why. But he doesn’t give us this context. He just calls them “Al Qaeda.”
The missing context is important. Not all of our enemies in Iraq are Al Qaeda, but calling all opposition forces in Iraq “Al Qaeda” is the latest trend in language control from this administration, and Yon plays along by repeating “Al Qaeda” over-and-over.
But who cares about causality? Al Qaeda killed them! Because they’re barbarians! And they attacked us on 9/11! And they’re planting bombs in London! They slaughter families everywhere!
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Blofeld, let’s establish a baseline of agreement. Do you feel this was a barbaric act? Do you condemn it and the perpetrators whoever they might turn out to be?
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 pm
“The fact that al Qaeda are savages, you great half-wit billhedrick, isn’t news to Angryclown. The only way you wingnuts think you can duck blame for the mess you created in Iraq, through lies and incompetence, is to hide behind al Qaeda’s barbarism.”
Well, I wouldn’t know you thought so by your responses, if I read only your posts I would think that GWB beheaded all the children himself.
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Blofeld, the context in the Yon piece was “Al Quaida is responsible for these atrocities, and at this point the US military presence is all that is preventing worse atrocities”. You didn’t like that context, you thought you’d prefer the one provided by an anonymous comment on a thread to an opinion column written by a defeatist lawyer.
“Conscience”‘s goal seems to be to say that somehow the US, rather than Al Qaida, is responsible for the atrocities that Yon describes, but his or her argument is so poorly organized that the only context “Conscience”‘s comment provides is a tangled web of assertions and blame.
The rhetoric of the left has never been good, but now those immersed in it (that would be you, Blofeld) cannot even seem to understand what a proper, meaningful argument is.
July 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Terry, you’re missing the point. Read the Greenwald piece.
billhedrick – what happened in this village is awful, heartbreaking, and sickening. No matter if the perpetrators were insurgents, Al Qaeda, or sectarian revenge killers, it’s all the same to the villagers.
July 3rd, 2007 at 5:04 pm
See, the assumption here, billhedrick, is that Americans like Angryclown have the right to petition their government (read: our slow-witted president) for redress of grievances (the clusterfsck he’s gotten us into in Iraq). And the First Amendment, plus Mitch’s good graces, permit Angryclown to educate you knuckleheads with his considered judgments on such matters. Al Qaeda, by contrast, doesn’t even have the thimbleful of sense God gave you wingnuts. They’re not paying any attention to Angryclown. Al Qaeda are best addressed at the by cruise missiles and rifles.
July 3rd, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Uh . . . I did read the Greenwald piece.
You chose to quote a silly comment to Salon article that you said provided needed context to the Yon piece. Yon said “Al Qaida”. You think an American Lawyer and opinion writer based out of Brazil and one of the people who commented on his anti-war article in an online liberal periodical are the go-to guys to put Yon’s reporting in persepective. You offer nothing to show this is true other than that you apparently agree with their ideologically driven agenda.
July 3rd, 2007 at 5:59 pm
“Al Qaeda are best addressed at the by cruise missiles and rifles.”
But “The right war at the right time”, right AC?
July 4th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Oh I get it Kerm. You still think Iraq was a haven for al Qaeda before we invaded and they followed us in. Guess you’re still watching FOX “News.”
Hit ’em where they ain’t, eh Kermite?