Current Events > The DUmpster

Normalizing Air War

(1/1)

Crazy Horse:
Feeble minds...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2792445


--- Quote ---JohnyCanuck (1000+ posts)     Wed Jan-30-08 02:47 PM
Original message
Normalizing Air War from Guernica to Arab Jabour
 About these advertisements
Tomgram: Bombs Away Over Iraq

Normalizing Air War from Guernica to Arab Jabour
By Tom Engelhardt

SNIP

From Barbarism to the Norm

The air war is simply not visible to most Americans who depend on the mainstream media. In part, this is because American reporters, who have covered every other sort of warfare in Iraq, simply refuse to look up.

It should be no surprise then that news of a future possible escalation of the air war was first raised by a journalist who had never set foot in Iraq and so couldn't look up. In a December 2005 piece entitled "Up in the Air," New Yorker investigative reporter Seymour Hersh suggested that "a key element of (any) drawdown plans, not mentioned in the President's public statements, is that the departing American troops will be replaced by American airpower… The danger, military experts have told me, is that, while the number of American casualties would decrease as ground troops are withdrawn, the over-all level of violence and the number of Iraqi fatalities would increase unless there are stringent controls over who bombs what."

After Hersh broke his story, the silence was deafening. Only one reporter, as far as I know, has even gone up in a plane -- David S. Cloud of the New York Times, who flew in a B-1 from an unnamed "Middle Eastern airfield" on a mission over Afghanistan. Thomas Ricks traveled to Balad Air Base and did a superb report on it in 2006, but no reporter seems to have bothered to hang out with American pilots, nor have the results of bombing, missile-firing, or strafing been much recorded in our press. The air war is still largely relegated to passing mentions of air raids, based on Pentagon press releases or announcements, in summary pieces on the day's news from Iraq.

Given American military history since 1941, this is all something of a mystery. A Marine patrol rampaging through an Iraqi village can, indeed, be news; but American bombs or missiles turning part of a city into rubble or helicopter gunships riddling part of a neighborhood is, at best, tag-on, inside-the-fold material -- a paragraph or two, as in this AP report on the latest fighting in an undoubtedly well-populated part of the city of Mosul:

"An officer, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the information, said three civilians were wounded and helicopters had bombarded buildings in the southeastern Sumar neighborhood, which has seen frequent attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces that have led to a series of raids."

The predictably devastating results of helicopters "bombarding" an urban neighborhood in a major Iraqi city, if reported at all, will be treated as just the normal "collateral damage" of war as we know it. In our world, what was once the barbarism of air war, its genuine horror, has been transformed into humdrum ordinariness (if, of course, you don't happen to be an Iraqi or an Afghan on the receiving end), the stuff of largely ignored Air Force news releases. It is as unremarkable (and as American) as apple pie, and nothing worth writing home to mom and the kids about.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174887/bombs_away_over_...
--- End quote ---


Needs to be stripped of his commision.


--- Quote ---Warpy  (1000+ posts)       Wed Jan-30-08 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. History International played the German movie "Dresden"
 several times over the weekend. The best word to describe it is "harrowing."

The nuclear blasts over Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't any more deadly or destructive than the carpet bombing and ensuing firestorm that destroyed every structure and most living things in the city of Dresden. The few who survived told harrowing stories of crawling through connected basements with the oxygen being sucked out by the firestorm in order to reach the river, and area where they had a chance of survival. Bombing that night occurred in three waves, with pilots in the last two waves reporting extremely dangerous conditions in firestorm air currents. It was overkill, literally.

Air wars in theory were supposed to destroy the willingness of a civilian population to support a war. In every case but one, they've had the opposite effect and solidified support for war against an enemy that would do such a terrible thing to non combatants.

The lone exception is Serbia, probably because the bombing was limited in scope and targeted a little better than carpet bombing in WWII.

Air wars against civilian targets are crimes against humanity. We can't pretend to be civilized until they are stopped.
--- End quote ---

 
Gee...................Who was the president when we bombed Serbia??

Yeah those two, airliners that flew into the world trade centers were crimes against humanity.

TheSarge:

--- Quote ---The lone exception is Serbia,
--- End quote ---

Proving once again that anything is ok to do as long as Slick is giving the orders.

jukin:
No matter what way a war is fought it is only righteous under a guy that rapes women and then has his fake wife go out and destroy those same women.

Navigation

[0] Message Index