portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

imperialism & war

It all started with a few people deciding to climb up the statue

Yesterday we liberated the boys in the kiddie gulag. Today, the Iraqi people topple a statue of Saddam in the middle of Bagdhad. It's been a great week! Hooray for President Bush!
Saddam statue toppled in central Baghdad square
US marines sent a towering bronze statue of Saddam Hussein crashing to the ground amid loud cheers on a central Baghdad square on Wednesday.

After fruitless efforts by Iraqis, it took the marines and a tank recovery vehicle with a crane to secure a chain around the statue's neck to pull it over.

Dozens of Iraqis jumped on the figure shouting with joy.

The statue was demolished after US tanks rumbled on to al-Fardus (Paradise) square in the late afternoon and dozens of people quickly gathered to watch and warmly welcome the troops.

The crowd soon set about trying to destroy the monument in a symbolic gesture marking the collapse of Saddam's Baath Party regime.

Initially, the marines covered the statue's head with an American flag, but then took that flag down and replaced it with an Iraqi flag around its neck.

homepage: homepage: http://www.abc.net.au/news/justin/nat/newsnat-10apr2003-3.htm

turn off the TV 09.Apr.2003 10:30

redworker

really,

the situation is a bit more complex. ofcourse most of the population hated saddam. it is amazing it took so long.he was a blood thirsty butcher. your favorite draft dodging rich boy's daddy and his friends in the cia helped put him in. and helped keep in in when he was butchering commies, bombing iran, and gassing kurds.

the bush gang in incapable of "installing" democracy. they can't bring it to florida, they sure can't bring it to bagdad.

it's the next 10 to 20 years that will define this war. the afgans sure liked to see the wing nut taliban disapear, but look at U.S. "nation building" there. money has run out for the army and police, so the wing nuts are filling the void. that sure didn't take long.

korea-50 years, germany-60 years. and that was in stable conditions, with peace treaties and stuff. think of the slow bleed in working class lives that this country is going to suffer. all the car bombings, snipers, suicide attacks, over the next 5, 10 ,15, 20-50 years of U.S. presence (oil should be gone by then).

not that the dandys on the top will lose loved ones. they prefer to leave that kind of work for the lower class, the ones who went looking for the bootstraps to pull themselves up by, and could only find combat boots.

conservative jingo's like you so funny. it's as if you think that the world is created anew every day the sun rises. as if history did not exist, it's all water under the bridge. lots of people hate those 300,000 U.S. troops that are squarly sitting in the middle of the middle east (look at a map some time). borders are leaky things.

this adventure did not make the world safer. it did not make the U.S. safer. it cost us civil liberties that took generations to win. turn off FOX. flush rush, and get a education.

draft dodging rich boy? huh? 09.Apr.2003 11:06

df

you are either mis-informed or just an idiot.

here is the photo of him as a Fighter pilot, After he graduated from Yale, and before he graduated from Harvard Business School with an MBA. if there is any doubt.
draft dodging rich boy? huh?
draft dodging rich boy? huh?

AWOL 09.Apr.2003 11:49

SONKING

didn't he go AWOL, even though daddy got him a cushy assignment in Texas or some shit? Either way we should all be ashamed that some moron who loves war but is afraid to fight in one get to play his war games at he expense of innocent lives runs the fucking country and is trying to run the fucking world. You should all be ashamed of supporting the archaic idea that the world is there for our taking and that we are in charge of enforcing "our" destructive, awful idealogy on the rest of the world. Shame on you!
"ON the wrong side of history" give me a break. I would much rather fight against this philosphy than ever be considered to be a part of these conquests.

Only limited 'liberation', if any 09.Apr.2003 11:54

David B.

I was originally (before the war broke out) expecting Baghdad to fall fairly easily. Then Basra proved more difficult than expected. To have Baghdad fall easier than Basra makes no sense to me at all, but there you have it. I'm still waiting for another shoe to drop on this one.

Who knows if they'll ever find Saddam or most of the inner Baath Party, or how difficult and bloody such attempts will be. The Vietnamese never got Pol Pot after they invaded Cambodia, and were plagued by various guerrilla movements for years after. If my memory serves me correctly, Pol Pot is dead because he died of natural causes, not because of any police or military operations against him.

At any rate, Iraq isn't going to be a democracy any time soon; it's a very hard place to rule and split amongst bickering ethnic groups. There may be a lengthy period of US military rule of a puppet dictator, breeding hatred and resentment of the USA.

Or the US may simply do an Afghanistan, and forget about nation building all together and just leave the place in the hands of various warlords with a national government that barely controls the capital city, creating another perfect breeding ground for terrorists. Or maybe another Iraqi dictator will rise to power, in which case he may end up being even worse than Saddam.

Portland, OR

re: draft dodging rich boy? huh? 09.Apr.2003 12:08

md

Hey DF aka dumb fuck,
nice picture...unfortunately the dipshit never left Texas in that purty uniform.

bush defends texas from vietnamese 09.Apr.2003 14:09

j

bush defends texas from vietnamese
bush defends texas from vietnamese

This thread is now censored of all dissent 09.Apr.2003 17:23

Indymedia Operative #1

This thread has been entirely cleaned of dissent. Only left-wing opinions are welcome here. All other opinions were thought-controlled ala Saddam.

censored thread?!! 10.Apr.2003 06:39

ironcutter

Hey Operative #1,

Removing infantile comments which are nothing other than name calling could hardly be called censorship. Whoever wrote them is incapable of intelligent discourse...typical M.O. for pro-war advocates.

Your arguments seem more like #2 to me.