The Aid Worker

National Guard

I walked into my house Friday evening at a couple minutes after 5:00,(after a doctor's appt)the news was on and featured was a woman aid worker who had been kidnapped in Iraq. She was simply on her way to work, when she was kidnapped. Now she is pleading for her life. The video of her is too earily similar to all of the previous men who have been kidnapped and ultimately beheaded.

So now they have taken to kidnapping women, not just male news reporters or contractors, but women too. Some one who was just simply on her way to work (to do some good)and who happened to be NON-IRAQ. It's very disturbing.

So, I ask this. Should America just wait until we have a coalition of the UN to do anything? Especially France and Italy? Because it might be the wrong war at the wrong time? Because we should wait untill the Iraq kidnappers really mean it? What's the threshold? It's only serious when more than one is kidnapped and only important enough when we have a consensus of all of the UN?

On the scale of moral ethics - do you take action when you know something is wrong? Or do you take action only after the majority agrees that it it wrong?

Dasher

But National Guard, I thought the U.S. did do something about a "sadistic, immoral" person who would carry out such atrocities -- it was called the invasion of Iraq.

My heart goes out to the woman (she has spent 30 years in Iraq working for Iraqi citizens)mentioned in your post as well as the others who have had their heads cut off by those attempting to influence those they see as "invaders" to get out of their country and oil fields. This is insanity! But we (the U.S.A.) are just as insane to invade a country, kill women, men, and children who are going about their business -- because we say our system would be better for them. Who asked us?

I really am not sure what Americans expect a country or people not even close to its equipment or war power to do. Who could not foresee that these kinds of things would not be the only type of retaliation they could fight with? Any student of history or even current events (stones, self-bombs, etc.)would have given us a clue.

deniseE

I feel badly for this woman and her family. I believe that she is married to an Iraqi man and holds dual British/Iraqi citizenship. She's worked for 30 years in Iraq, both under Saddam and under the new authority.

Those that kidnapped her are working their own agenda...one unavailable (at least to this extent) in Saddam's government.

I don't know what the answers are.

National Guard

Yea, but what would you like to see be done about it? How would you prefer our leader handle it? I am not sure if you're saying it was or wasn't predictable - but it is here now and how should it be handled?

marc

It is ironic that you do not hear outcry from the Clerics and other leaders in IRAQ, but the all ask for restraint with respect to Fallujah.

dchr9203

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-25-04 AT 04:38PM (CST)[/font][br][br]T

National Guard

?

dchr9203

Oops! Had a DUH?! moment. I say on the moral scale you take appropriate action when you know there's a real problem. Trouble with that is one's definition of a problem is not the same as another's. As for me and most morally conscious humans, kidnapping, torturing, and murdering innocent men, women and children would be defined as a problem and I don't need a majority consensus to come to that conclusion.

Don D

I agree. I put the mentality of those who say those people have a right to do that because we are there in the same category as I put those who claim inner city youth have a right to roam and rape and pillage and steal and shoot because society has offered them no options. Can anyone conjugate that sentence?

Dutch2

Not me. I haven't conjugated since Latin class.

Dasher

Let's not spend time dealing with grammar when the larger issue is miss-stating responses. No one said there is a "RIGHT" by anyone to do evil things (like roam, pillage, steal, cut off heads, etc.). Just apply the same standards to all. How can one sanction invading a country and roaming, pillaging, stealing, etc., yet not allow for others protecting their country -- by means they may find necessary. This is not a simplistic situation that can be declared right or wrong. And the situation of American youth (inner city or otherwise) acting in criminal ways is not always a simplistic situation -- but let's save that for another day.

For too many Americans it is do as I say you are to do - not as I do; understand my position, but I don't have to even consider yours.

dchr9203

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-26-04 AT 12:57PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Are they protecting their country or their perceived right to roam, pillage, rape, kidnap, torture? Some would say they're one and the same, some would not. Hmm, I'm confused. Or am I? In my little simple way of thinking, I see protecting my country as, figuratively speaking, standing on the boundary and preventing crossing. When THEY attacked US on 9/11, I don't recall hearing about Americans on U.S. soil kidnapping and beheading theirs and demanding they stop coming at us. And, if anyone thinks they've stopped coming at us....think again.

JudyT929

There were americans who targeted Muslims in the U.S. after 9/11. I personally know a woman who stopped wearing her traditional clothing because she feared reprisal simply for being Muslim. The difference in this country is we have a government in place to deal with "insurgents" and Iraq is still too primitive to have the same in place. I am certainly not condoning the kidnappings and beheadings but I don't think America should "officially" retaliate for something that didn't even happen on our soil. People who put themselves in "harms way" are aware of the risks they are taking, and I admire them greatly for doing so, but I don't think they should expect our government to protect them.

Dasher

"When THEY attacked US on 9/11"

The THEY referred to above is exactly who? Just asking for clarification.

Don D

It's not clear who you are accusing of invading a country and pillaging and stealing. I understood you to imply that 'we' are the invaders. Are 'we' also pillaging and stealing?

We can debate the cancer of unsupervised, ill-raised, "I've got a right to be angry" inner city youth any time you'd like. That will more likely be the ruination of America than will be our destruction by missiles and bombs. In the past fifteen years I have carefully watched certain leaders from certain corners of society imply, in fact state, that the individuals involved have no responsibility or blame, that society at large is to blame. It's tough to put 'society' in jail for blowing the head off a 13 year old rival or for stealing your ninth car in two years or for gang banging in parking lots. x:-) peace.

Dasher

Yes, we (the U.S.A.) are the invaders who are pillaging,stealing and killing in another country -- and we are doing it under the guise of liberation of the Iraqi people.

I would probably be closer to you than you can imagine should we discuss unsupervised and ill-raised youth -- but would not necessarily restrict it to "inner-city youth" as if there are not plenty of well supervised and beautifully raised ones in inner cities and ill-raised and unsupervised ones in suburban neighborhoods. We have to find a way to stop talking in slogans as if it is us and them all the time and on every issue.

We all have a stake in this country and indeed this world. I don't know how to do that smiley face, but you know I wish you peace and love.

marc

I think I hear the echos of Abbie Hoffman?

National Guard

And now they have moved on to the Japanese. The news last nite showed the familiar setting of hooded men in the background with a hostage in front. This time from Japan. IMHO, the Iraq insurgents are trying hard to engage themselves in an all out war(with everyone). They are not going to stop. It is inconceivable to me that Kerry blames this on Bush? That they would just play nicer if we hadn't gone over there!

Don D

Dasher: In all seriousness, I watch and listen to the news constantly and have spoken to quite a few returned servicemen, two of whom work for me and two of whom are my son's best friends. I have not at all gotten the feeling that our airmen, marines and soldiers are pillaging and looting. I would guess it could happen sporatically, but, don't have a gut feeling or belief that it is generally happening and certainly not condoned if it should be isolated. That's a rather harsh, blanket indictment of our men and women in the armed forces. But, seems I've heard that before, back around 1971 from a fellow named Kerry.

Dasher

My reference to the pillaging and looting was to the war itself (because I do not agree that the USA had proper provocation to invade). If the Iraqis wanted to get rid of that dictator -- and we assisted them, that's one thing, but to declare ourselves the moral authority and go over there and bomb and pillage, to me is unconscionable. There are people being killed -- moms, fathers, children -- going about their own daily business.

Oh no, I am not at all referring to our brave soldiers who are doing their duty in that G _ _ forsaken country. Like you, I have friends and relatives serving. They have no choice once the country sends them.

I am as misunderstood on this issue as Kerry's 1970's position, I fear.

mrbill

This is a very sorry set of circumstances, in that the insurgents would take a defenseless woman, who has done her best to help the Iraqui people for 30 years. We must understand that this is a foreign society to us. We are being humiliated in Iraq. There was "No" war when we invaded, since they knew they could not win, and they have turned it into a guerilla war, which is doubtful, we can win. The Military does not want to be there, and this, to me, is a very scary scenario. You might want to read Thomas Friedman's article in NY Times for 10/24. the American soldiers are called "Jews", as they are lumped into the same mix as Jews are - in short, hated people. Why, is beyond me, except to acknowledge that they have been persecuted for centuries. This is GWB's war...Where are the WMD ????. The whole world is against us, excepting Great Britan. We need to cut our losses, and bring the trops home, to defend our country. "If you love your Uncle Sam - bring them home".

deniseE

We are at war in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Period. The link was never clear and in the years since has never been established or proven.

This is not a political position. But a statement of fact.

The people in Iraq cannot be labeled with one term, just like americans they differ in motive and beliefs. While a majority of Iraqis may be glad to be rid of Saddam...others may see it as an opportunity to take power in the country.

We are immersed in a culture that we do not understand...and that makes this job much more difficult.

owenlady

My heart breaks everytime I hear of this and we see it played out.

BUT I cannot understand those who don't see and don't feel and don't know that these same people who are guilty of this kidnapping want only to be able to come here and do it to us.

EVEN to those of you who think peace, love, flowers and hugs will solve it all.

It would be difficult to convey your support of them as they cut your head off.

And yes, there are links between Iraq and Al Qu....

Dasher

But Owenlady,

What if "they" don't care a hoot about coming over here and doing it to us -- what if "they" just want to live without having us going over there and doing it to them?

As an optimistic realist, it is not just about peace, love and flowers for me, but rather about trying to walk in another's shoes. I don't want another country invading us and I don't want us invading theirs. Imagine for just a moment that you are an ordinary Iraqi -- exactly what would you do?

Don D

"We are at war in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Period. The link was never clear and in the years since has never been established or proven.

This is not a political position. But a statement of fact."

Denise, you must not be aware of the proven fact that Al Q were TRAINING in Iraq prior to and after 9/11. It looked like a duck to me. And Saddam sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to the families of those who were in the planes. Maybe I'm lame-headed, but if it quacks like a duck.......

National Guard

Don't forget to mention that Kerry voted and agreed with Bush's logic at the time. The best information said there was a link. Now we know some of the info was sketchy and it is easy to point a finger (after the fact) and say oh no, Bush must have known before any of us that this wasn't true and therefore it is his fault. How come no one points the finger at Kerry and says he must have known Bush was lying at the time but never spoke up until now. It is only now that he brings this up?

Dasher

I almost give up -- but not quite.

Bush (the administration) said the war was about Saddam and Weapons of Mass Destruction -- Not about terrorists or training or any such thing.

Congress voted to give the authorization for Bush to go to war if necessary -- but a state of war was never declared by Congress. Oh, shoot I am tired and not saying this right. What I want to say is that your facts are not correct NationalGuard.

Don D

Yes, her facts were correct. And it is not necessary for Congress to declare war. What civics book are you reading?

National Guard

The aid worker just died. Was executed! God Bless Margaret and her family.