A War in Which Everybody Appears to Be Under Fire

for some reason the US thought it would bring peace

A War in Which Everybody Appears to Be Under Fire
L. Ramnarayan, Arab News Staff

JEDDAH, 28 March 2003 — The road to Baghdad, the allied — or, to be precise, the Anglo-American — forces are finding out, is not strewn with roses but weighed down with bodies and riddled with uncertainties.

In the mad rush to war that trampled the wider international argument for peace and reasonable alternatives under foot, the political leaders who caused this conflict will have to carry the heavy responsibility of the lives lost in this illogical war — illogical, because the weapons of mass destruction are now arrayed against the very person and government said to have hidden them. The war began despite global condemnation and calls for diplomacy to prevail.

President George W. Bush was given emphatic backing for this war by the people of America, who wanted, somehow, to get their own back for Sept. 11, 2001. Now the US/UK forces are discovering that Iraq will not be such easy pickings as they thought. Despite Saddam’s brutalities to his own people, their patriotism and distrust of the invading forces have stuck a pin in the allied bubble.

A week has gone by in this conflict and claims and counterclaims have dominated the airwaves. The only certainty in all this is that the war now will be fought on Saddam’s terms, despite the “shock and awe” bombardment by the allies.

They may yet pay a heavy price, chasing the goal of regime change in Iraq, which remains defiant. For the bitter clash for Baghdad will be fought between the US forces and Saddam’s elite Republican Guards, and the threat of heavy casualties still looms.

Death and injuries are to be expected in the heat of battle. But what has been singularly unexpected is the failure of the “smart” weapons that the allies boasted of.

The conflict began with fatal chopper crashes that displayed a lack of cohesion among the allied ranks. Also, weapons using satellite and other technology for precision guidance failed to be precise in where they landed.

They first drew the wrath of Iran for being less than adept in geography, before the Apache and a Blackhawk either fell or were captured intact on Indian territory.

But the real damage was the loss of lives following attacks from within and friendly fire. And the British have been at the receiving end of this. First a Patriot missile hit one of their aircraft; another battery fired at a friendly aircraft; and then there were reports of a friendly aircraft targeting a Patriot battery.

This was all surreal. Were they at war or at games? But tragedy struck from their own quarters as grenades were launched in a camp at Kuwait by one of their own, and then a Challenger challenged another Challenger.

No, it was not Bush throwing down the gauntlet to Saddam for a one-on-one on the mat. But, ironically, two Brits lost their lives on Tuesday when the two British tanks exchanged fire. A case of “brotherly” rather than “friendly fire” you could call it.

In another grenade attack, another American was killed.

And in yet another case of friendly downing, it is reported by the Daily Mail that the probable deaths of the three ITN journalists could have been the result of friendly fire. An investigation is under way. Reports are that these journalists came under allied tank fire, or could have been caught in a crossfire.

Many could still die from the guns fired from their own side, but the length of the conflict could well be defined by imponderables. It could also increase the scale of death.

The two main questions being, first how the vaunted Republican Guard will measure up to the awesome allied firepower, and the second being whether the allies, if lured into urban warfare in Iraq, can live up to their aims of limiting civilian casualties.

Whatever the outcome, the new millennium is going to see a lot of realignment. Widespread international outcry against the war is sure to grow. For, left unchecked, all could be at the mercy of the ultra right, or the ultra self-righteous.

As the scenario unfolds in real time for all of us, the only hope is that this pressure by the people will put the US and UK governments under fire. Be it friendly or brotherly. For freedom itself is at stake.

http://www.aljazeerah.info/28%20op%20eds/A%20war%20in%20which%20everybody%20appears%20to%20be%20under%20fire,%20by%20L%20Ramnarayan%20aljazeerah.info.htm

Majestic,

If I am not mistaken I believe you are an Arab... And to be honest the Arabs are to blame for this conflict. Arabs have all the resources and sitting on the biggest oil reserves. How many Arab states prepared themself for this conflict how many countries tried to acquire nukes or ICBMs? Only when your butt was kicked you started thinking about arming yourself what were you doing for last 50 years? Make no mistake this will happen over and over until you are in a position to pay back in the same coin.. I hope this be a lesson to other states and they prepare themself. NK is a beggar compared to Arabs and even they have done an awesome job to defend themself.. real shame!!!!!!!!

A difficult read:

Raw, devastating realities that expose the truth about Basra

…] Far more terrible than the pictures of dead British soldiers, however, is the tape from Basra’s largest hospital that shows victims of the Anglo-American bombardment being brought to the operating rooms shrieking in pain.

A middle-aged man is carried into the hospital in pyjamas, soaked head to foot in blood. A little girl of perhaps four is brought into the operating room on a trolley, staring at a heap of her own intestines protruding from the left side of her stomach. A blue-uniformed doctor pours water over the little girl’s guts and then gently applies a bandage before beginning surgery. A woman in black with what appears to be a stomach wound cries out as doctors try to strip her for surgery. In another sequence, a trail of blood leads from the impact of an incoming – presumably British – shell. Next to the crater is a pair of plastic slippers.

…] Mohamed al-Abdullah, al-Jazeera’s correspondent in Basra, must be the bravest journalist in Iraq right now. In the sequence of three tapes, he can be seen conducting interviews with families under fire and calmly reporting the incoming British artillery bombardment.

…] The unedited reports therefore provide damaging proof that Anglo-American spokesmen have not been telling the truth about the battle for Basra. And in the end this is far more devastating to the invading armies than the sight of two dead British soldiers or – since Iraqi lives are as sacred as British lives – than the pictures of dead Iraqi children.

Dispite Yank and Brit lies Basra is firmly in Iraqi hands out of despration the cowards are bombing civillians in the hope they will rise against saddam.

My big fear right now is the chance that US-UK forces might start killing civilians in large numbers since the war is not going their way. Some "analysts" on TV are of the opinion that the number of US-UK casualties can be reduced if the "rules of engagement" are changed, i.e. don't worry about civilian deaths.

A well placed MOAB could cause Basra to fall very quickly.