As to your (and Gregg's) thoughtful recommendations, I would venture to guess that I knew more people who died in the Twin Towers than either of you. That's a guess, mind you, and if I'm wrong, then please accept my sincere apology. I do remember vividly, however, that as I was preparing my lecture at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia, the first plane hit the North Tower at 1 World Trade. And it wasn't lost on me that a dozen or so colleagues and friends worked in there and in the South Tower, which was hit 18 minutes later. I have returned to that hallowed ground many times since, so your invitation is not necessary, thanks all the same.
You both also speak as though you have personal experience in Iraq. I must admit to not having been in Baghdad since early 2007 (having first 'visited' 15-years earlier in 1991), but surely things haven't changed that much since then. If it has, maybe you guys can help me to better understand. As for me, the anger and lingering bitterness of 9/11 has never diminished; it is why I am in my present job. The memories of a savage attack and the lost friends has never ebbed.
But for the life of me, those memories notwithstanding, I cannot fathom the willingness of some people to economize the value of the lives of certain people simply because they are, by accident of birth, denizens of a war zone, and perhaps more damning – an Arab war zone. The family in that bus didn't ask for Saddam Hussein, 9/11, or the invasion of their country. And does anyone really believe that they deliberately ignored an order to stop? (In fact, the International Herald Tribune reports that they may have already stopped when one soldier inexplicably fired into their van. At best, the facts are unclear, which is why courts – civilian or military – are the best arbiters of truth in such matters.) And do we really need to detail the undisputed physical devastation that family suffered?
More important, though, is not the particulars of this sad incident; tragically, this sort of event is all too common in places where civilians and soldiers come in contact. The difference is that usually everyone dies and there are fewer 'complications' in any after action report. What caused me to comment in the first place was what I saw as remarkable callousness – a lack of simple humanity – in the comments from a few of our GT40 brethren. It surprised me, and I would have hoped for better.
Kim
Kim,
Where does one begin. I believe you once again have made assumptions.
Your reply, to me at least, rings of smugness and your own arrogance. You speak of loss of life and state: "I would venture to guess that I knew more people who died in the Twin Towers than either of you" and "I was preparing my lecture at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia, the first plane hit the North Tower at 1 World Trade", and "And it wasn't lost on me that a dozen or so colleagues and friends worked in there and in the South Tower, which was hit 18 minutes later " .
Well, if you lost ten friends, and I only lost four, do your words ring more true than mine? How about if you lost ten friends and I lost one relative. Does my family relationship trump the number of friends you lost? So someone who professes to have so much compassion for human life, I would think ONE person caught up in Sept. 11th would be more than enough. Your service in the Fedearl Law Enforcement is appreciated, and I thank you for it, but please bear in mind that it does not elevate you above anyone else. Please accept my condolences on the loss of your friends. As a lifelong resident and NATIVE New Yorker I appreciate your sentiments.
"You both also speak as though you have personal experience in Iraq. I must admit to not having been in Baghdad since early 2007 (having first 'visited' 15-years earlier in 1991), but surely things haven't changed that much since then. If it has, maybe you guys can help me to better understand."
Kim, I have no experience in Iraq. I have no idea where my post remotely suggests same. Although you may have had boots on the ground for the military which I will not assume you had, does it lessen my point about a soldiers right to self preservation?? I think not. Things haven't changed in Bagdad since 1991 and guess what, they probably haven't changed much since the beginning of time. Its history is one of hostility and unfortunately, it will most likely remain a hostile environment during my grandchildren and great grandchildren's lives. That is of course, if the area is not nuked first. Hatred is passed down from generation to generation. How do you suppose to counter that?
You go on to further state: "
But for the life of me, those memories notwithstanding, I cannot fathom the willingness of some people to economize the value of the lives of certain people simply because they are, by accident of birth, denizens of a war zone, and perhaps more damning – an Arab war zone." Who has done that??
"The family in that bus didn't ask for Saddam Hussein, 9/11, or the invasion of their country. And does anyone really believe that they
deliberately ignored an order to stop?" Again, where was this reported?? Do you have access to intelligence that we do not? To me, you appear to be fabricating facts/assumptions to support your position.
For all you know, the Saadi's worshipped Sadam. It is all irrelevant. Bottom line is, if the Saadi's failed to heed the Diggers order to stop, the Diggers were probably justified in firing upon the vehicle.
I'm surprised that my "Redneck" buddy is not outraged that the Diggers were such lousy shots and only wounded two of the occupants of the vehicle.
Perhaps Australia should remove their troops from Iraq and train them better.
I'll go make the popcorn now and await my lashing.
