April 22, 2003
quote of the day
The war in Iraq has been particularly bloody for journalists, whether they are embedded with U.S. troops or simply staying at their hotel in Baghdad. Two weeks ago, when U.S. troops fired on Reuters cameramen right in the Palestine Hotel, I was willing to believe that it was an unfortunate accident, and that the journalists were killed inadvertently. Until I came across this article, in which the tank commander claims that "he was unaware the building was packed with journalists." How the hell can we, sitting here in our homes in the U.S., know that journalists were staying there, and not the tank commander across the bridge? And that's the best he could come up with after two weeks of questions? (Earlier reasons for shooting on the journalists included that snipers had attacked from the hotel, a claim which was later dismissed when other reporters at the hotel reported that no snipers were present.)
Sounds like the old story of the grunts not being told anything. I can't figuare a reason why the US would intentally attack these reporters.
Posted by: Derek on April 22, 2003 01:24 PMA Spanish cameraman died in the attack. It was said at the time that US forces had set the hotel as a military objective two days earlier, but nobody told the reporters about that. The Spanish government didn´t even ask for an explanation of the incident to the US secretary of state. So it seems there will be no trial for the murderers or for the one(s) who ordered the attack.
Posted by: José Manuel García-Patos on April 22, 2003 02:50 PMExcuse me, but it was a war zone! And, unlike the civilians who live there, the journalists had a choice to stay or go. They knew the risks, better than we arm-chair generals, by far.
The grunts in the field know only so much. I doubt very much that anyone, even someone armed with the knowledge that there were journalists in that building, who just spent days in combat, would be able to identify the hotel in a strange city with possible shooters around every corner. On top of that, if I hear that my guys are taking fire (true or not) and I see in the distance, some dude on a rooftop or in a window holding a camera (or maybe it's an RPG? Hard to tell when you only have seconds to choose.) I'd take him out. Not gonna wait for him to pull the trigger first. Not much different than pointing a toy gun at a cop and being surprised at being shot. Sorry, dude, better luck next life.
It's a regretable incident. No question about it. Murder? Maybe, but blame the civilian authorities who put the grunts there in the first place.
Save your sympathies for the civilians who lost their lives. They are the ones that had no choice, and paid the ultimate price for [insert today's reason for the war here].
Posted by: 0xdeadbeef on April 22, 2003 05:19 PMHmm. The problem is that the reasons given for the shooting have changed. First, it was the snipers. Then that was discarded when journalists said they hadn't seen any. Then it was some guys using binoculars from the roof of the hotel. Then that seemed to get scrapped. And finally this. The fact that they didn't know the hotel had journalists. Seems odd is what I'm saying.
Posted by: moorishgirl on April 22, 2003 05:47 PMThe problem is that you can´t shoot journalists. They´re protected by international laws, just as prisoners of war are. And the assasins knew they were there. Everybody knew, where do you think most of the images you saw on tv were taken from? Another Spanish journalist died under Iraqi fire, but at least he was in the line of fire with the marines, that was the risk he took. The ones in the hotel were not supposed to be in danger. That´s why they were there with all their cameras and equipment. Besides, is it rational to use a tank to response to a sniper? My sympathies go with all the victims in both sides, civilians or not. I think this war was a crime. In a perfect world, everyone responsible for it --including my own government, sadly-- should be judged as criminals against Humanity.
Posted by: José Manuel García-Patos on April 23, 2003 08:35 AMArmchair generals would know the journalists were there because we're getting our information from their reports. The troops in the field get there information from their commanders, who get it from intel, who get it from...?
Therefore I can't hold any blame at all to those in the field or even thier direct commanders, maybe even extend that up a couple of rungs.
However, I do understand your point about saying one thing, then another. That's a serious problem our govt has with nearly everything, here in this land supposedly free, open and run by a govt by for and of the people. We have only token control over our government and they in turn feed us lies. It's an exhausting battle overall and one that seems futile in fighting very much. However, cases like this will get it in the most trouble over the long haul, by creating a larger credibility gap than is already there.
It's easy to second guess from a distance. It's another matter when you hear/feel enemy H.E. going off inches from your head. Plus, your view of the world is entirely thru a small periscope. As stated before, it's a WAR ZONE. Warriors do not think like civilians, especially when being shot at.
"The fog of war" is not just a trite phrase.
Post a comment
About
bio articles news contact rssMy Events
04.26: LA Times Festival of Books04.30: Claremont, California
09.23-10.04: International Literature Festival Berlin
Search
My book
Hope & Other Dangerous PursuitsIn hardcover
Buy a Signed Copy!In Morocco
De l’espoir et autres quêtes dangereusesIn Italian
La speranza e altri sogni pericolosiIn Portuguese
A Esperança È Uma TravessiaIn french
De l’espoir et autres quêtes dangereusesIn dutch
Hoop en andere gevaarlijke verlangens Hoop en andere gevaarlijke verlangens (paperpack)In spanish
Esperanza y Otros SueñosMonthly Archives
April 2008March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001










Comments