Where’s the outrage?

Porphyrogenitus: Where Have All the Flower Children Gone?

Porphyrogenitus notices that no human shields seem to be packing for Iraq.

I figured that if anything was deserving of such protection as having a ring of human shields to prevent bombing, it might be a Red Cross facility dedicated to succoring the Iraqi people.

Remember them? Although a number left Iraq, disgusted that Saddam wanted them to shield things like power plants and airfields instead of hospitals and schools, I’d think that they would be ALL OVER this. Isn’t protecting things like the Red Cross from violence used for political effect EXACTLY the sort of thing they claim to stand for?

Maybe they’re lying.

Seems to me that they hate Bush and/or the USA so much that they’re more than willing to sacrifice a few Iraqis if it means US policy gets a black eye. Remember that next time they and their kind stage an anti-war protest. (via Instapundit)


  1. The purported purpose of the human shields was to make American commanders, pilots, and soldiers think twice before ordering off the cruise missile, bombing, or shooting whatever since it would kill an American citizen. However misguided that hope may have been … How, exactly, does an American human shield give an Iraqi terrorist even a moment’s pause? ***

  2. That’s a good point, Mike, even though many of the human shields were not Americans but Europeans. My point, though, is that there’s not a peep out the groups, including those that sent human shields, that opposed the allied invasion of Iraq solely on the grounds that innocents would be hurt and killed. The so-called ‘peace’ and ‘anti-war’ activists really seem to be ‘anti-US’ activists, and their lack of reaction to attacks on UN and Red Cross facilities is revealing. And why aren’t militant Arabs speaking out against this? Or hunting down the perpetrators? They, actually, seem to be the ones saying that the sacrifice of a few Iraqis is worth harming the perception of American progress. And the (correct) suggestion that terrorists wouldn’t be dissuaded by international peaceniks kind of scuttles the UN’s approach, anyway, doesn’t it? ***

  3. Two points- 1) Baghdad airport is still not open to commericial traffic which makes travel to Iraq without military help very difficult. 2) Human Shields would mean nothing to a suicide bomber who wants to kill as many people as possible to make a big impact. That whole article is just stupid. Human Shields even if they could get to Iraq would serve no purpose. Perhaps if the Iraqis saw more progress towards getting their country back, we would be seen less as an occupation force as that problem is just going to get worse over time. ***