Exchage with Iraqi human Rights Org
I forwarded the letter in the previous post to:
It seems support for US intervention is relative to what one stands to gain from it. Although it is nigh on impossible to argue with someone who has had first hand experience of what Saddam was. Though I'm sure some of those who have experience of what the US is in Iraq would have differing opinions.
Dear Khalid, (Spokesperson, Iraqi Human Rights Organization in Ireland)
This is a copy of an email I have forwarded to the Irish Times editor in response to your letter in the Times.
If this email was sent in error I apologise for any inconvenice.
Many thanks for your kind letter.
I hope to get some free time to write back to you about the many mistakes thatyou have made in your letter. Its problematic for non Iraqis who do not have adaily contacts with Iraqis inside Iraq and also do not know its history andculture to be accurate when they make dangerous conclusions about what is goingon in Iraq these days. Its like myself writing about the political map ofIreland without having enough information about the history and the Irishculture. However I can not wait to tell you about one of these mistakes, youare totally wrong to say that the "terrorists are focusing on the Iraqipolice". For your information the terrorists left 14 car bombs in manycivilians areas of Baghdad killing as I said indiscriminately the Innocentpeople of Iraq, it is so bad to have little knowledge and also it is painfulfor me to believe that you the civilized Western is given the killers who aretrying to create a new Taliban in Iraq an execuse to kill the Iraqi police whoare giving protection to our nation.I think this is enough for the time being.
Thank you for the thoughtful response.
However I feel you have misrepresented my point. I have not given any excuses for insurgent attacks. I have simply pointed out what researches have found to be the most reliable identification of insurgent targets.
The Sunday Telegraph recently reported the results of a poll undertaken by the British MoD, the results were a damning indication of the lack of support for coalition occupation. The poll found that "up to 65 per cent of Iraqi citizens support attacks [on British troops] and fewer than one per cent think Allied military involvement is helping to improve security in their country."
Which also supports the findings of a report conducted by The Center for Strategic and International Studies at the end of 2004. It concluded that the Iraqi insurgency was "largely domestic in character, and had significant popular support," while the number of attacks on Coalition Forces accounted for approximately 75% of all attacks.
I am certainly not attempting to justify attacks on innocent civilians.
Thanks again. I am talking about what I have got from your letter and not whatyou have in your mind. I hope that you will try to read it again but as anneutral observer and see clearly for yourself if its not "a terroristssupportive letter".I do not want to go further but let me tell you that these 14 car bombs wereleft just during the last two days and killed many kids and elderly people andyou and others have no option here either to support the coming national unitygovernment or the terrorists.
Many thanks again,
I accept you do not wish further correspondence so I will refer to my original email:
"it the courage of those who fight a +non-violent+ insurgency that will end occupation and prevent civil war."
Those that are fighting both occupation and the violent insurgents\r\nthrough peaceful means, such as protest, are the best hope for peace in Iraq.
Thanks for your time