Iraqi Minutemen?

[Stevendsmith]

My coworker, who is no fan of Bush, took great offense to Michael Moore’s characterization of Iraqi resistors of the occupation as Minutemen—especially in light of the recent bombings that killed school children.

What are your thoughts?

Here’s the quote and link.

The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win. Get it, Mr. Bush? You closed down a friggin' weekly newspaper, you great giver of freedom and democracy! Then all hell broke loose. The paper only had 10,000 readers! Why are you smirking?

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php

[truthspeaker]

1. He's right for the most part, but the suicide bombings are different

I don't think there's a single coordinated resistance movement. I'd like to think the bombings of civilians come from outside agitators but there's not enough evidence to know that right now.

[seabeyond]

2. this is how i see it n/t

yup

[KoKo]

3. Suicide Bombings seems to be their answer to protest. But here's a link

to PBS's Patriot Day Exclusive from a couple of nights ago. I posted that I thought there were similarities to Falujah. Our strategy in Iraq has proven to do nothing but insite folks to want to work against us. Shutting down the newpaper and other efforts to "propagadize" to the population has met with more violence. Their strategy is wrong, but not unlike what the British did to us, by ignoring the "rag tag" population of the Colonies thinking they knew better.

Here's the link if any of you are interested. It sank like a stone when I posted. Maybe folks thought I was glorifying the Iraqi Insurgents or something. :eyes:

PBS Last Night did a Lexington/Concord Battle/Patriot's Day/Faluja/Iraq



for all you Northeastern DU'ers who are interested. There are similarities with Iraq/Faluja maybe?

Those folks fighting for freedom from "occupation" and "tyranny whether from Saddam or US and Special interests might want to read this. Decide for yourself what the similarities are.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/patriotsday/peopleevents/e_aftermath.html

[DrWeird]

4. I agree with it.

Doesn't everybody?

Why not?

[karabekian]

5. michael moores an idiot

way to further paint the left as anti-us and against the troops.

[truthspeaker]

9. what a load of crap

He didn't say he was rooting for them. He just said they were patriots fighting for their country.

[The White Tree]

6. I beleive that is the way the insurgents view themselves

I just finished reading 2 books by Jeff Shaara about the American Revolution - "Rise to Rebellion" and "The Glorious Cause" and throughout reading these I had similar recurring thoughts. In some ways it is somewhat eery. These are excellent books by the way.

Throughout the war the British consistantly maintained that the revolutionaris were just a small part of the population and that everywhere they went they'd be greeted by throngs of grateful Tories who would jump to their banner and fight for the king.

Most of the British generals viewed the American methods of fighting as uncivilized and showed no respect for their enemies deeming them as less worthy then true English people, and in some cases as thugs.

The British had and used overwhelming force to win the battles they fought while Washington used delaying tactics, retreats, snipers and ambushes to survive with his army (including crossing the Delaware River on a major religeous holiday, (Christmas). In Iraq we seem to hold the view that the insurgents fighting us don't play fair but who can say what is fair in war.

Nathan Hale, who said, "My only regret was that I have one life to give for my country", was captured as a spy after helping other American insurgents start fires in New York city where the British were staying for winter quarters. The city still had a civilian population that was adversly affected.

One more, my memory is vague, but the author descibes the situation in the south (particularly North and South Carolina) between Tories and Revolutionaries as not so much about freedom but as using the war for score-settling and personal vendettas.

I could probably think of some other examples but those are the main ones and I don't have much time. These being said, viewed objectively I do not think terrorist bombings that kill civilians could be considerred the same thing as what the minutemen did in the revolution but, viewed from the prism of the insurgents I could understand their view that the ends justifies the means and that they are freedom fighters. After all look at the horrible things we've done in this war, the civilians we have killed using the same justification or as Mr. Moore mentions closing a small paper because we feel threaten, locking down a town, etc.

Thanks for asking.

[ACK]

7. Guess what real simple

The people going for our soldiers in a direct manner attacking the military are fighting for their freedom -- the Minutemen thing kind of works then.

The people that blow away Danish hostages or set off car bombs or use suicide bombings are terrorists.


+

[Ernesto]

8. I had an epiphany in the middle of the night

about 36 years ago. After a shoot out with some "insurgents" (VC) just outside of Danang, I realized that we Marines were the "redcoats".... I couldn't help wondering why these poor little bastards would want to mess with us. Then the light went on for me: We were the assholes who invaded THEIR country....