The names and/or pictures? I just think people who are gleeful about al-Zarqawi's killing ought to have a bit of context and understand the cost of their "turning point."
Well, the people gleeful about this are unlikely to be given much pause by "Aysha El-Saudi age 34 and Selim Jr., age 7 were also among the dead", or whatever it'd be, with pictures or without. I agree it would be fair to the dead to at least be acknowledged by name; on the other hand, maybe it's better to keep their identities protected for the sake of their families? I mean, you start poking around, you end up with more questions: was the woman there voluntarily? -- makes her look bad (This presumes Wahhabist women have the agency to volunteer) Was she there by force? Makes al-Z look bad. Why did al-Z hide out somewhere were women and children would be exposed to the violence which he knew he might be targetted by at any point? Makes him look bad, again. I'm afraid I don't see any way that the details on the woman and child killed make the Americans look bad, sorry; and so, this will hardly give pause to the warhawks -- they're either al-Z's victims or his allies.
I wasn't so much thinking of warhawks; they're not the only ones cheering about this. I'm more about deconstructing the myth of surgical strikes and terrorist masterminds in isolated fortresses. The reason why civilians get killed by Americans is not because the terrorists are hiding behind children, but because America has invaded actual cities where people live.
I mean, this is obvious to anyone rational, but many Americans still seem to think that they went in to fight Saddam, and then al-Zarqawi.
Surgical strikes and precision killing with "bunker busters" (where bunker = family home, in this case?) -- that didn't even occur to me as a rationale. I'm amazed no civilians in nearby flattened homes were killed. That we know of, anyway.
I would disagree, though, with the assessment that the civilians are getting killed solely because invading armies have come into the citites. There is at least a feedback loop here. Who is "ultimately" to blame for innocent lives being taken presumes a prime mover instead of a chain of causes, often circular, but I am comfortable to saddle the responsibility for civilian deaths on the target of a reasonably expectable attack who knowingly chooses to live with/associate with/hide with civilians.
During the Warsaw Uprising, a quarter of a million of civilians were killed by the German army who massacred them to break the partisans' morale and used them as human shields -- that, to me, is the sort of gold standard of an invading army in urban combat which absolutely SHOULD be held accountable for civilian casualties. Much as I may dislike American policies, this particular attack really doesn't strike me as being of the same species. YMMV.
But the model of armies meeting on fields, or firing across trenches, hasn't existed in a good long time. So for me, the responsibility for dead civilians lies with the invader/occupier.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 02:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 02:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 02:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 02:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:50 pm (UTC)I mean, this is obvious to anyone rational, but many Americans still seem to think that they went in to fight Saddam, and then al-Zarqawi.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 05:52 pm (UTC)I would disagree, though, with the assessment that the civilians are getting killed solely because invading armies have come into the citites. There is at least a feedback loop here. Who is "ultimately" to blame for innocent lives being taken presumes a prime mover instead of a chain of causes, often circular, but I am comfortable to saddle the responsibility for civilian deaths on the target of a reasonably expectable attack who knowingly chooses to live with/associate with/hide with civilians.
During the Warsaw Uprising, a quarter of a million of civilians were killed by the German army who massacred them to break the partisans' morale and used them as human shields -- that, to me, is the sort of gold standard of an invading army in urban combat which absolutely SHOULD be held accountable for civilian casualties. Much as I may dislike American policies, this particular attack really doesn't strike me as being of the same species. YMMV.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 06:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 02:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 02:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:34 pm (UTC)I think I said "Accident insurance"
Arabic puns: not my forte!
no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-11 02:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-11 10:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-12 08:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 03:44 pm (UTC)I think a widespread hijab/yellow star protest would be awesome, though.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-10 05:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-10 03:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-11 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-09 11:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-10 03:06 pm (UTC)