Al-Amiriya...The Ultimate Mistake From The Last Gulf War

by ISP 30 Replies latest jw friends

  • ISP
    ISP

    Friday, October 4, 2002

    Shrine to victims of tragic error
    Wreaths, flags, prayers mark place where hundreds of civilians died

    By LARRY JOHNSON
    SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER FOREIGN DESK EDITOR

    BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Al-Amiriya is an example of the worst that can happen, despite smart people and smart bombs.

    In February 1991, during the Persian Gulf War, a U.S. bomb punched a hole through the roof of the Al-Amiriya bomb shelter; seconds later a missile plowed through the opening.

    Paul Kitagaki Jr. / P-I
    An Iraqi man holds a peace offering at the Al-Amiriya bomb shelter in Baghdad, where by Iraqi count 408 civilians died after a U.S. bomb and missile destroyed it in 1991.

    By Iraqi count, the blasts killed 408 civilians, mostly women and children. Many were killed by the concussion, the rest by a fire so intense it left flash-burned outlines of women and infants on the walls that are still visible today.

    The United States has said it believed it was targeting a military command center.

    Today, although much of the visible damage in Baghdad from the Gulf War has been repaired, the shelter remains largely as it was after the bombing. It is in a pleasant, middle-class neighborhood, although, with potholes and broken windows here and there, it is a neighborhood that is showing signs of wear.

    The shelter has become a pilgrimage site for political and religious delegations that come to Baghdad. The cool, gray and charcoal-colored corridors are lined with memorial wreaths and the flags of many nations, along with signed prayers from foreign leaders.

    There also are hundreds of photos and drawings of the women and children who died, along with favorite toys, books and other personal belongings left by survivors.

    Paul Kitagaki Jr. / P-I
    Photographs and drawings of those who were killed, many of them women and children, line the walls of the Al-Amiriya bomb shelter.

    Fatima, a middle-aged woman who lost her husband and children in the bombing, greets all visitors at the entrance. The night of the attack, she had gone to a friend's house. She said, "I should get back to the shelter." But her friend said, "You go there every night, so, why don't you just stay here tonight."

    She did, and now she is alone.

    After the bodies were removed from the shelter, Fatima moved onto the grounds and has never left. She lives there, giving tours to anyone who comes along, and asks for donations to maintain the site as a shrine.

    The deaths at the shelter were just part of the toll from the Gulf War. Estimates vary dramatically on both the number of non-combatants killed -- anywhere from fewer than 1,000 to 25,000 -- and soldiers killed -- from a little more than 1,000 to tens of thousands.

    There were 214 U.S. and allied casualties during the war.

    If the United States launches an attack, this time the death toll could be higher, from the immediate fighting and from the renewed destruction of the country's infrastructure, according to U.N. officials and in the opinion of people on the streets.

    "We don't like the war . . . it is horrible, but, believe me, everyone in Iraq will fight," said Al' Saeed, a technical engineer at an office on Karata Street, in a busy commercial district of the city. "We have lived from 1990 until now with the embargo, also another kind of war, a kind of fighting . . . with food and medicine. It is very bad."

    Many Iraqis who could afford to have left the country -- at least 1 million of Iraq's 23 million people in the past 12 years. They are the ones with the most education, the cream of the middle class.

    Those who remain could face a food crisis if war breaks out, some believe.

    Although the past two years have brought good rainfall, which means a good harvest this year of wheat and dates, many Iraqis would starve without the United Nations food program. The average Iraqi has about six weeks of food at home, and there is perhaps another six weeks in U.N. storehouses.

    EDITOR'S NOTE:

    P-I foreign desk editor Larry Johnson and photographer Paul Kitagaki Jr. have been dispatched to Iraq to report on the mood and conditions as the country is under threat of attack from the United States. They are among only a handful of Western journalists reporting from Iraq.

    Reach P-I foreign desk editor Larry Johnson at 206-448-8035 or [email protected]

  • Simon
    Simon

    I remember all the news and 'spin' when this happened. Denial and lies.

    It would be so much better if governments would tell the truth:

    "we messed up, killed a load of kids and are sorry ... if we find we did this because of someone's negligence or maliscious intent then those responsible will be prosecuted"

    Instead we just get

    "the USA will not subject itself to any world court"

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    I forget - how many Kurds did Sadaam murder? Where is their shrine?

    How many innocent civilian Kuwatis did Sadaam's leave hanging from lamposts in Kuwait? Where is their shrine?

    There is a saying, "war is hell," and this is one of the facets of that hell - innocent people sometimes die, and some good soldiers die from friendly fire. The equation is balanced by the greater number of lives that will not be destroyed by a tyrant permitted to develop and use his weapons of mass destruction on a large scale.

    There is a line being drawn in the sand - literally - between the forces of civilization and the totalitarian forces of fanatical Wahabism. Civilization must win, because the alternative is unacceptable.

    Or is everyone prepared to accept Sharia as their law? Islamo-Fascists have no tolerance of atheists, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus or Jews. Don't think your life will become a Peaceful Paradise if the intolerant fanatics have their way.

    All the appeasers of Islamo-Fascism say that Sadaam has no weapons of mass destruction. If that is true, why has he said he will use those wapons - weapons he "doesn't have" - when Uncle Sam pays a visit?

    I know a lot of people are upset right now. That's OK - they can thank the USA later.

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    Q: What is SALMAN PAK?

    A: The Iraq Terrorist connection: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    : An Iraqi man holds a peace offering at the Al-Amiriya bomb shelter in Baghdad, where by Iraqi count 408 civilians died after a U.S. bomb and missile destroyed it in 1991.

    Four hundred and EIGHT citizens. My, oh my. Sadaam killed THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND of his Country's OWN citizens in the Kurdish rebellion, and he did it with torturous chemicals.

    Muslim terrorists killed nearly THREE THOUSAND innocent American citizens ON PURPOSE on 9/11 and this report is whining about an accidental killed of only 408 innocent Iraqis during a real WAR?

    Only idiots will get upset about this kind of bullshit.

    There are always civilian casualties in a war and the USA and Western Nations more than ANY Moslem nation goes out of it's way to prevent them. Get used to it.

    I had a felony conviction by the United States and a sentence of two years for being just such a peace nik and refusing to accept military and alternative military service, so don't think I haven't seen both sides. I have.

    There is a time for war and there is a time not to have war. This is a time for war.

    Farkel

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed

    If Iraq had not invaded Kuwait to rob their oil, after depleting his own treasury during the Iranian war, there would have been no Gulf War nor accidental bombing of this bunker.

    If Saddam had disarmed as mandated by the UN resolutions over the past 12 years, Bush would have no reason for a current war, avoiding the possibility of a repeat of this.

    If hijacked airliners had not been flown into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, there would have been no linkage of Iraqi officials with Al Qeada and subsequent war against terrorism.

    If the international outcry was directed were it should be, against Iraqs refusal to disarm and account for weapons of mass destruction, there would also be no need for war.

    Everyone seems to acknowledge that Saddam is an evil, sadistical, tyrant, of a dictator, but there is no outcry against him, only against those who wish to end his evil reign. The world waited with Hitler until it was almost too late and look how many lives were lost. Now, I see it happening all over again. Had the peaceniks been as boisterous during the 1940's, we may all be marching a goose-step today. The Battle of Britain and subsequent inclusion of Isolationist America in World War 2 is what stopped him then. If not for that, the outcome just may have been drastically different. "Live and let live" is a fantastic western philosophy. Try to convince radical Muslims of that, though.

    History repeats itself.

    Give Freedom a Chance
    By WILLIAM SAFIRE

    NEW ORLEANS

    How should free people feel - in our hearts, brains and guts - about
    launching a pre-emptive strike?

    Note that we are not "starting a war" with Iraq. That was begun by Saddam
    more than a decade ago. We won the first battle, but he has since been
    secretly violating the terms of surrender. Either we will allow him to
    become capable of inflicting horrendous casualties in our cities tomorrow -
    or we must inflict and accept far fewer casualties in his cities today.

    That's a Hobson's choice, which is no choice at all. We will now get on with it. We will not whip ourselves into jingoism, or become fascinated by our exercise of ultra-tech superpower or suppress our sadness at the pictures of Iraqi civilians Saddam will thrust into the line of fire as human shields.

    But we should by no means feel guilty about doing our duty. War cannot be
    waged apologetically. Rather than wring our hands, Americans and our allies
    are required to gird our loins - that is, to fight to win with the
    conviction that our cause is just. We have ample reason to believe that
    Saddam's gangster government is an evil to be destroyed before it gains the
    power to destroy us.

    It is futile to try to reason with passionate marchers waving signs
    proclaiming that America's motives are to conquer the world and expend blood for oil.

    Nor should we waste more precious time trying to beg or buy moral approval
    from France or Russia, their U.N. veto threats largely driven by economic
    interests in Saddam's continuance in power. Nor should we indulge in placing second thoughts first: How much will it cost? How many will be killed? How long will it take? Will it kill the snake of terror or only poke it? Will everybody thank us afterward? Where's the guarantee of total success? Too cautious to oppose, these questioners delay action by demanding to know what they know is unknowable.

    Our task now, as citizens of nations burdened with the dirtiest work of
    mankind - a pre-emptive attack to finish a suspended war - is to call up the national spirit and determined attitude needed to sustain a great effort. Skepticism is a fine American trait and many find patriotic fervor uncool, but the eve of hostilities is the moment for opening the mind to
    exhortation.

    We are launching this attack, already too long delayed, primarily to defend
    ourselves. This is a response to reasonable fear. We know Saddam is
    developing terror weapons and is bound on vengeance; we know he has ties to
    terror organizations eager to use those weapons for more mass murder; we
    know he can bamboozle the U.N. inspectors again; we know Americans are
    terror's prime targets. That's plenty of reason to take him out.

    But this reasonable fear should be accompanied by a strong dash of hope.
    Wilsonian idealists have found a soulmate in President Bush, who surprised
    us all with his challenging vision - not merely a "vision thing" - for the
    coming generation.

    The defeat of Saddam may just send a clear message to Kim Jong Il and other
    tyrants that we will respond with more action than ransom to nuclear
    blackmailers, thereby making the world a safer place. But safety is not all.

    The liberation of 23 million Arabs and Kurds now ruled by a bloody-handed
    dictator, followed by a transition to a confederation (aided by an
    Arab-American general like John Abizaid, now Gen. Tommy Franks's deputy
    ),
    may just make it possible for a rudimentary democracy to take root in this
    major Muslim nation.

    Such a birth of freedom in Iraq, a land of oil wealth and a literate
    population, may just spread to its neighbors and co-religionists. This would counter the cancerous growth of repression and rancor that has roiled the Middle East and impoverished the people of 20 nations.

    If Bush's vision of a transformed region fails, it will fail while daring
    greatly - a nobler course than that weakly advocated, in Teddy Roosevelt's
    words, by "those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

    This campaign near the Ides of March will make us safer, allaying our fears; it has the potential of making the world freer, justifying our hopes.

  • Simon
    Simon

    You do not want to start comparing numbers killed to decide right-or-wrong ... the western countries come out very, very badly.

    We use economics as a weapon and starvation as a warhead.

  • Trauma_Hound
    Trauma_Hound

    Simon you forgot spent uranium also, how many thousand of innocents has that killed, including some of our own civilian clean up crews. I'll tell you what folks, you side with murders, I myself I have more compasion for my fellow man. There are ways to take Saddam out without a full war. But it's not about taking him out, it's about taking the country over, and putting a puppet government in place.

  • Guest 77
    Guest 77

    I just so happen to be browsing my TV and I came across an interview held between Tim Russert and a NY Times writer, Tom Friedman. Mr. Friedman has a book out titled, 'Longitudes & Attitudes' that has to do with the current impending crisis in Iraq and what it will 'cost' to remove Saddam Hussein on both sides. He said, this is not about oil, and if the US acts alone there's going to be some serious consequences on both sides because it is not thorougly thought out. He's all for removing the dictator but not if its going to have international implications.

    I daily associate with a local that spent time in Vietnam and his main job was picking up bodies. Those who side with war need to be there when the action begins. I personally asked him if he was scared while in action, he unhesitatingly said, YES! He said, don't think for one minute that no one is scared. He gets his share of flash-backs. For us to sit back and say let's go kick butt, it's easier said than done. People need to ask, WHERE did all these countries get their destructive weapons from and WHY where they sold to such countries? WE need to look behind the scenes and see who's pulling the strings. If war is the answer, then we need to look in our own back yards and solve personal and community wars.

    Guest 77

  • ISP
    ISP

    I noticed a few responses that were along the lines of 'so what - Saddam has done worse' . Is that it? If we kill less than him, we are OK?!

    ISP

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit