Supposedly a blog from someone in Bagdad: http://dear_raed.blogspot.com/ (Whatever, it's an interesting read).
One thing that's been on my mind lately, is the way war has evolved etc, and living in war.
Haven't been to war myself, obviously.. but.. well..
The interesting thing is that, 90 % of the people in a war-area, of the civilians, go on living as if it's a normal day etc. When you see pics from Bagdad, you see the streets filled with cars.. as if it was normal Rush Hour.. etc..
People just going on living, mostly having a harder time than usual since nothing, electricity etc, works as it should.. No water, no TV etc.. The Credit Cards not working in the store, where receits has to be written out by hand etc..
They say the same about Serbia..
It could be full blown war 100 yards away, and you wouldn't know it, by looking at a normal, peaceful street where somebody was hanging up clothes to dry etc..
The abnormalities of todays warfare with bombings etc..
In the Gulf War, they started using precise bombing. A lot of the idea was, as it is today, to make the people rise up against Hussein. If you look at the reporting from the Gulf War, you get the idea that they used only smart bombing. Today we know the truth.. only 5 % of the bombs used were smart. The rest was conventional (dumb?) bombs, that killed wherever they falled.. and don't make any mistake.. thousands upon thousands of civilians were killed in Iraq during the Gulf War. One of the reason being that.. if you want to create fear, to give a "warning" etc.. smart bombs doesn't work..
Why would people feel any fear, when they know that Govermental building is gonna be blown to pieces sooner or later, but not themself (unless the smart bomb lose it's wits).
USA discovered that in the Gulf War and had to get more and more into conventional bomb raids, and the civilian casualties increased every single day. And when it was all over, the infra-structure was down, meaning thousands dying from diseases etc. That was the only way they were able to create some terror, which might be a terror that felt worse than Hussein's terror. Of course, it failed. People suffering beyond imagination, and yes.. they did start to fear USA. Today, even those being for USA in the Gulf War is against USA, remembering what they did back in the Gulf War. Because they fear they'll have to endure that suffering again (thanks to USA (and UK etc))
At the same time, of course, USA now can't start bombing whatever, since you're not supposed to kill those you're there to liberate.. It's, for sure, not good for any popularity points.
At the same time.. Civilians do get killed. USA has even targeted at least one civilian target in this war, with the aim of bombing it. To make it even worse, it wasn't the civilian target they were after, so they bombed a civilian target they didn't want to bomb.
But... What impressions does people get?
Some faceless people they can't see, throwing bombs at them from a long distance. Spots on the sky dropping bombs. How on earth, are they able to connect the two.. "USA/UK/Denmark/Australia" and Liberation.
How would a kid losing his parents grow up thinking?
Sure.. I'm liberated, but I'm still an orphan..
and how many would wanna exchange their relatives to get some kind of "freedom", which they migt not having asked for in the first place? Especially since the one's suffering the most from Hussein, only were people at the edges of Iraq. In the south, where people feels closer to Saudi Arabia, in the North were the Kurds wants their own country etc, and being direct opponents of Hussein.
Hatred feeds hatred feeds hatred feeds hatred feeds hatred feeds hatred, how good the intention might be..
Love, on the other hand, more often than not makes people love you back...
It's darn hard showing love by throwing bombs.. It could be mistaken for something else, you know..