Friday, September 29, 2006

The Highway of Death

The Ranter
The Views of The Ranter

Howdy Kilroy 60, Well, here we are and nothing is yet answered to you as I said, this has to be your decision, not what other people think. Your stand on the military is commendable and I applaud you for it. It is not often someone has unanswered questions and still maintain respect as you. Perhaps I can shed a tad amount of light on the Highway of Death issue.

You have stated the standard media line of the Highway of death containing relatively few bodies. Still today this one event has a tremendous amount of controversy surrounding it.

Whatever the case the amount of Iraqi bodies had nothing to do with the executive decision to call an immediate halt in hostilities. The actual scene of the devastation, vehicles, tanks and varied forms of burning and destroyed transportation strewn about the landscape was simply enough for that call. They were acutely aware that one scene would have devastated various factions in America as well as the rest of the world.

For example, this comment taken from WikipediA discusses various distinct points of views from supposedly on scene eye witness accounts.

“The offensive action for which the road is infamous became a controversial point, with some commentators alleging that the use of force was disproportionate, that the Iraqi forces were retreating, and that the column included prisoners and civilian refugees. Although no reporters were present during the action, and media accounts did not appear for almost a month, photographs taken afterwards showed dramatic scenes of burned and broken vehicles. The bombings were cited by some observers as a war crime — the deliberate bombing of a stretch of highway where fleeing and "out of combat" Iraqi soldiers were stuck in a frenzied traffic jam.

The United States, however, stated that few Iraqi soldiers were found in the wreckage. According to a PBS Frontline interview with Rick Atkinson, when asked whether we know how many Iraqis were killed on the Highway of Death, he answered: "I don't think we'll ever know how many Iraqis were killed there. There were about 1,500 vehicles on the highway of death, counted, destroyed vehicles after the war. And another 400 or so on another road, a spur that ran parallel to the coast. Those who wandered through this wreckage right after the Iraqi surrender found relatively few bodies. Certainly some, and many that were terribly incinerated of those that were found. But the prevailing view is that many of the Iraqis had simply gotten out of their vehicles and ran. And it's difficult to believe that deaths on the highway of death probably exceeded more than a couple of hundred perhaps."

The Independent's Robert Fisk got there in the aftermath of the allied bombing. In his book "The Great War for Civilisation", Fisk describes the scene of kilometres of damaged military and civilian vehicles that was bombed as they were stuck in the traffic jam. He describes the burnt out remains of the occupants of the many vehicles. "I had seen hundreds of dead here; there must have been thousands.”

I can attest to the fact that from a media standpoint the body count is not always the deciding factor to the American people. Any combat veteran will tell you that often the scene immediately following contact is beyond comprehension and sometimes enough for the troops to feel they just destroyed a large amount of enemy, when in truth the scene does not tell the true story. Someone may fire at us and we in turn will light up the landscape returning fire with devastating firepower.

Display that same scene to our arm chair quarterbacks sitting in their livingroom watching the war on CNN and all they can see is death and destruction. It matters not that the only thing destroyed in the equipment, it is in the eyes of the beholder and that was what Powell and company based the decision on, not the body count.

Take a look at the photo of the scene, from someone sitting in their livingroom they would see this and our A10's still lighting them up and feel we are totally on overkill. No matter how many dead, we are bad due to the scene.

2 comments:

Kilroy_60 said...

Somehow, I had a feeling that I should make one more visit here tonight. It appears, again, that we are in agreement on this point. It was the image, the impression that was the deciding factor. The facts, whatever they were didn't matter.

The views I express at times are admittedly exaggerated in the spirit of Gonzo! I am very sincere, and troubled, when it comes to the questions I have, the feelings I experience when it comes to the war in Iraq.

There are those that will tell you I am a pacifist. Yet, when the hostages were held in Iran I wrote a column stating, "We did it to Japan. We can do it to Iran." Had any of the hostages been killed I was ready to enlish. That's easy to say decades removed; it is nonetheless true.

I didn't hesitate to say, which was not a popular position at the time, that we should have continued into Iraq the first time around. The military leaders at the time were remarkable in executing the war, I thought then and still do, but then were overly generous in the terms of surrender.

When I came to you and asked for your insight, when I asked for a contribution of thought to my post questioning "Why?" it was never my intent to cause this uproar. I regret that my issues have taken over your blog today. Moreos, I am sorry to have taken up so much of your time.

I think that what happened with "The television war" where the media was not only limited, but totally controlled by the government was a major mistake. Vietnam was hell for you that served; it was also traumatic for those of us who watched the insanity every night on the news. If the media had free access during Gulf War I, I think, things would have gone differently. There would have been as much support at home and the images we are discussing would not have had the power they were given.

There is a great deal of blame cast upon the media today in terms of there being a negative impression of what is happening in Iraq. This again, I think, revolves around the fact that there is a great deal of government control.

It's unfortunate that The Highway Of Death was an end instead of an open door to getting the job done.

The Old Ranter said...

(Kilroy 60) “Somehow, I had a feeling that I should make one more visit here tonight. It appears, again, that we are in agreement on this point. It was the image, the impression that was the deciding factor. The facts, whatever they were didn't matter. “

(The Ranter)I am glad we are on the same page.

(Kilroy 60) “There are those that will tell you I am a pacifist. Yet, when the hostages were held in Iran I wrote a column stating, "We did it to Japan. We can do it to Iran." Had any of the hostages been killed I was ready to enlist.”

(The Ranter) Often incidents as this brings out the patriotism within us all.

I recall during the Missiles of October with JFK and Nikta Kruschchev i was only 16, but my friend and I were gungho and wanted desperately for our parents to sign permission for us to enlist so we could run off and fight the Red menace.

Thanks to the age being 17 and my Father telling me I was wrong I did not run off and lie about my age.

Of course, that became a moot point one year later when I enlisted to run off and fight the red menace.

(Kilroy 60) “When I came to you and asked for your insight, when I asked for a contribution of thought to my post questioning "Why?" it was never my intent to cause this uproar. I regret that my issues have taken over your blog today. Moreos, I am sorry to have taken up so much of your time.”

(The Ranter) Thank you, but that is one thing you did not do, I welcome our exchange and I know that Wild Bill enjoyed stating a few of his opinions at my request.

All in all, this is a nice break from my normal ranting and raving.

Actually I am quite happy to have had this exchange and I want you to know that you are always welcome to question anything on my blog.

I am totally pro- military and support the men and women of these services with every ounce of my body, however, I do not agree with all of our policies and operational commands, I support the men and women in the field and due to that I will never discuss something that may affect them emotionally. That does not mean I support that specific theory or operational orders.

If you or anyone else has a question, ask it. You may be surprised at the answers.