August 11, 2004
MAKING GEORGE BUSH POL POT?:
Cemetery Fight Haunts Some U.S. Troops: 'It Doesn't Feel Right Sometimes,' Soldier Says of Eerie, Perilous Battle in Najaf (Karl Vick, August 11, 2004, Washington Post)
Bats flapped out of crypts, startling soldiers creeping through the cemetery with guns up. Graves opened beneath their combat boots. And an old enemy displayed a new professionalism, darting in clearly practiced moves between tombstone and mausoleum to stalk the Americans from above ground and below.In the battle to control one of the world's largest graveyards, U.S. Marines and soldiers say they are coping with a lot, including lingering regret. The vast cemetery in Najaf is sacred to Shiite Muslims, perhaps 2 million of whom lie buried in miles of desert adjoining the shrine of Imam Ali, son-in-law of the prophet Muhammad. [...]
To close observers, the final signal for decisive battle came with the departure of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the senior Shiite cleric in Iraq and a longtime opponent of Sadr, who is widely regarded as an upstart. Sistani, who is famous for not having left his Najaf house in six years, traveled to London last week, just as the fighting with Sadr's militia erupted. The official explanation -- treatment for a heart condition -- brings a smile to the lips of U.S. commanders here.
"A lot of people think it's the green light for us to do what we have to do," said Maj. David Holahan, executive officer of the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which has responsibility for Najaf.
"The people will tell you they want it to end," said Army Lt. Col. Myles Miyamasu, a battalion commander in the 1st Cavalry Division's 5th Regiment, which hurried from Baghdad on Thursday to reinforce the Marines. "They're ready for this to be over."
On Tuesday, while senior commanders huddled to discuss an endgame, the cemetery once again doubled as a killing field.
Perhaps this phrase isn't as objectionable if your paper did not--like our local liberal rag--did not extract "killing field" and put it in the headline, but the implicit comparison of the fight against terrorist thugs to the Cambodian genocide is vile. Posted by Orrin Judd at August 11, 2004 8:13 AM
Forgeting Cambodia, it has a nice ring to it.
Posted by: genecis at August 11, 2004 9:16 AMFighting in a graveyard, eh? All they have to do is spray the area with the Trioxin 3-5-4 that the Return of the Living Dead movies proved the army has by the ton and let the zombies do our work for us. Then freeze 'em with the gizmo that Col. Kent McCord invented in RotL III and go have a beer. Problem solved!
Posted by: Governor Breck at August 11, 2004 11:19 AMAt least you don't have to worry about civilian casualties.
Posted by: Robert Duquette at August 11, 2004 12:25 PMThe Hajjis are only too glad to hide in mosques and hospitals and the like. Compare and contrast this with the Germans in WWII, declining to occupy Monte Cassino until after the Allies bombed it, and even helping the monks remove their art treasures for safe-keeping.
Subject to considerations of military necessity and proportionality, it is legal to engage an enemy who takes refuge in a protected place. Politically, how~~~~, it were best if we left the clearing of mosques to the territorials.
Posted by: Lou Gots at August 11, 2004 4:58 PMMy local newspaper headlined the story on Sunday about fighting in Najaf with something like "23 civilians killed in Iraq fighting". Yeah, that sure accurately sums things up...
Posted by: brian at August 11, 2004 4:59 PMThe Hajjis are only too glad to hide in mosques and hospitals and the like. Compare and contrast this with the Germans in WWII, declining to occupy Monte Cassino until after the Allies bombed it, and even helping the monks remove their art treasures for safe-keeping.
Subject to considerations of military necessity and proportionality, it is legal to engage an enemy who takes refuge in a protected place. Politically, how~~~~, it were best if we left the clearing of mosques to the territorials.
Posted by: Lou Gots at August 11, 2004 4:59 PM