I wonder how the U.N. will react...

[Joe DeFuria]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-08-19-iraq-unblast_x.htm

Most of you have probably heard the news by now. It'll be interesting to see how the U.N. reacts to this...

 

[RussSchultz]

With all out war on the US, of course.

Indymedia is telling me the US administration did it as payback for opposing them.

(there are lots of kooks out there, btw)

 

[Dr. Ffreeze]

/sigh

Why do so many people believe the worst in others? Why do people believe in black helicopters? Why do so many people believe in conspiracy theories?

/sigh
Dr. Ffreeze

 

[pax]

I dont get it... Why would the UN blame the US for this?

 

[RussSchultz]

Well, the UN isn't. The nuts on indymedia are.

But, of course, the US is behind anything that hurts anybody, according to them.

 

[Willmeister]

Well, the UN could blame the USA for lack of protection. It's also the UN's fault because now Iraqis view the UN as just another arm of their occupiers; that the UN is America's b*tch (which the UN allowed itself to become).

But it's also an attack on the USA by proxy. Militant groups are going after easier targets. And they seem to be blowing sh*t up at will all around American-controlled Baghdad. $50.00 says the militants are playing to an American audience. "See how you don't own Iraq as Tom Brokaw said you would on the eve of war!"

I did find it funny that BBC World had an expert who said it had to be Al Qaeda. Like it's hard to fill a cement truck with explosives, drive to your target and blow it up. Americans like that commentator must really think non-Americans are hopelessly stupid and incompetent because anytime some person blows up a car in the Muslim world, it must be the work of some large-scale international syndicate like al-Qaeda. "They're so backward, they need large-scale international funding to change a lightbulb." There was nothing sophisticated about the UN attack at all... nothing. Car bombs are old hat. Bombs in trucks have been going off every ten years, in the region, since the mid-1940s and maybe even before.

 

[pax]

But I dont think the UN would be so crass as to blame the US for lack of security. Certainly it has ample experience that when entering such danger zones it knows how to assess the security of the installations it intends to use. Even without a standing UN army the UN still has plenty of expertise and can at least make demands on its member countries for proper protection before it sends its personnel into those areas.

Id be stunned if the UN blamed the US here.

Al Qaeda and terrorism have become interchangeable and meaningless in the medias reporting to me.

The real problem is that Iraq is becoming a gathering call for extremists to fight americans. And they'll likely fight any sign of western presence there. I think creating a large Iraqi army to maintain law and order cant happen soon enough and westerners to leave or limit their presence in the country for everyone's good. Id like to see US soldiers at least able to leave the streets and remove themselves for the targets they are to those extremists. I dont expect the US bases in the country to be vacated anytime soon tho... Basically will have to do what they did in Saudi Arabia and that is to limit their presence and contacts for the foreseeable future.

UN maybe should've have had better protection against such attacks but its their fault for not having better assessed their security needs.

 

[RussSchultz]

Errr...go to indymedia. These nuts aren't saying "the us should have protected the UN". They're saying "The US planned the bombing for these reasons..."

Nuts I tell you. Nuts.

 

[Willmeister]

Id be stunned if the UN blamed the US here.

The UN won't though. You don't want to reward the perpetrators with an enlarged split between the UN and the USA. Last thing you want them to feel is progress of any sort. That's the problem with elements such as these, they can spin anything to their receptive audience.

UN maybe should've have had better protection against such attacks but its their fault for not having better assessed their security needs.

Last thing you want to do is allow the US to protect you in Iraq, unless you happen to be an oil installation or pipeline (and even then given the sabotage). I thought anyone with half a brain figured that out by now...

 

[pax]

I dont care about indymedia forums or any ultra right or left wing addicts paranoid opinions all that much. I do care about the UN and its declarations and peoples perception of the UN.


Will way I see it is that modest security measures for a major UN installation probably didnt need us forces to help out. Simple cement barriers and some security police probly would have been enough to keep car\truck bombs from getting too close...

I think the UN felt they werent targets so didnt bother here.

 

[Willmeister]

Errr...go to indymedia. These nuts aren't saying "the us should have protected the UN". They're saying "The US planned the bombing for these reasons..."

You realize some of these people posting comments like those brag on Free Republic that they put stuff like that on...

 

[RussSchultz]

It would certainly make me feel better about humanity in general if I knew all those people weren't lunatics.

However, I can assume that they're not all "freepers" out to discredit indymedia(though that would be pretty humorous), which means at least a few of them are lunatics.

 

[Clashman]

It would certainly make me feel better about humanity in general if I knew all those people weren't lunatics.

However, I can assume that they're not all "freepers" out to discredit indymedia(though that would be pretty humorous), which means at least a few of them are lunatics.

It's an open forum, and you know that. Because of that, you get people spouting off to whomever they think might listen to them. I for one am actually comforted by the fact that the people posting these ARE lunatics, and in fact not representative at all of the left. Contrary to your posting, you seemingly imply that these in fact ARE representative of the left, so you can dismiss more serious works in much the same manner.

By trawling FreeRepublic I can find much of the same comments from the other side of the spectrum, but I don't make my judgement of the right on those comments. (BTW, if you really want to find some scary stuff, I suggest checking out the yahoo news message boards).

 

[RussSchultz]

Egad, it gets loonier than indymedia?

 

[Clashman]

You don't read Free Republic, do you?

 

[zurich]

Whats interesting is that all non-western media is reporting that the Iraqi resistance has CONDEMNED the bombing, and said that none of their cells are responsible for it. Considering the past behaviour of terrorist groups jumping to take responsibility, I find this interesting. Ofcourse, the only real conspiracy theory byproduct of this is that the US media hasn't reported the above..

 

[Fred]

What I find pathetic is that 90% of Iraq is pro US pro UN, they are absolutely begging people to stay in the region to protect them from the other 10% who are completely nuts. Yet the media puts a completely different slant on it.

I've been talking with Aussie soldiers (my sister is dating one) who returned from Baghdad, they said the people were extremely nice to them for the most part, offering them food and water. They also said that one minute the American base ball cap was on, and the next minute (when the militants walk by) its 'die America'.

The people there are so used to being told what to do, that free thought and truthfullness extroverted is just not known there. Its hard to make heads or tails out of what they really want, (although my money is on Freedom and soveriegnty, but who knows)
...
Al Qaeda, and other terrorist organizations often do not claim bombings until weeks after the fact. They also apparently frequently claim responsibility for acts not commited by them.

What is for sure, is that there are a large group of foreigners in Iraq (at least thats what the soldiers said), many of them mercs (not necessarily the religious fanatic types). Seems like vested interests around the regions have ulterior motives and schemes.