Socio-Political Rants
So where are all the Cheering Iraqis now? Truth is always complex. Here is an article on the feelings of humilation and happiness Iraqi feels on the Capture of Sadam. LA Weekly never fails to sneak in a more questioning perspective in its news when we need it most…
The View From Baghdad – Sorting through conflicting thoughts on Saddam
By Adam Davidson LA Weekly Writer
BAGHDAD — Ive spent the last few days driving around looking for those signs of exuberant jubilation that you see on CNN. I dont know where they find them. Ive come across one anemic parade down Karada Street, a few dozen men and a handful of women chanting out, Saddam is nothing. The women were the most exuberant. Four older Shiites in black abaya robes saying, over and over again, in Arabic and English, I am so happy. I am so happy. Along Karada, the main shopping strip in Baghdad, men stood in front of their shops, staring blankly at the revelers.
That was the only celebration Ive seen. The streets are particularly empty this week, more because of the gas shortage than anything else, and the people who are out seem — what is it? — not happy, not miserable, just sort of resigned, and pensive, and shocked. Some celebratory gunfire could be heard on the streets Sunday night after Saddams arrest was announced. But it was nothing compared to the all-night shooting a couple of months ago when Iraqs soccer team qualified for the Asia Cup. That was so constant and heavy we thought the full-on revolt had begun.
The Iraqi response to the capture of Saddam Hussein is a lot more complicated, a lot more difficult to understand, than the simple pictures that are coming out: angry protesters in Tikrit, celebrations everywhere else. Almost every Iraqi Ive approached, and Ive approached a lot of them, says pretty much the same thing: Yes, yes, Im happy. But they dont look happy, and they dont have much to say about Saddams capture. At a gas station in southern Baghdad, an inconceivably long line of cars snakes down a road, around the corner, and up over a bridge all the way across the Tigris.
One cabdriver, Emad, said, Yes, Im happy Saddam was caught. Then he spent several minutes complaining about how little gas there is in Baghdad and how he has to spend 12 hours every other day in this long line. A few blocks east, an appliance salesman said, Im happy, and then went into a long speech about how the economy is so bad and nobody is buying his refrigerators or TVs.
I was with my friend Amjad on Sunday at the press conference where official word came and the first images of Saddams health check were shown. Amjad was smiling, but told me he really wanted to cry. Ive spent most of the time since with him and have watched him be giddy, glum, distracted, angry. I asked him to sit down and explain what hes been feeling all week. Im not happy, he said, then corrected himself. You can say Im happy and sad. For sure, its a mixture of feelings inside all Iraqis here. You can feel they are happy, but if you sit with them and reach the depth of their feelings, you can sense the sadness. You can sense the anger. Its very strange to get all these feelings together in one moment.
Amjad didnt want me to think his confusion meant he supports Saddam. Of course, I hate him very much, because he caused all this suffering. I have two of my relatives whove been killed by Saddam. Im sad because the people who captured Saddam were not the Iraqis. For sure, if Iraqis got him, they would not give him any chance to stay alive. Hes very happy the Americans caught him. Im also sad because theres a feeling inside me saying this guy is still an Iraqi guy, and arresting him in such a humiliating way is very sad for me. Hes still Iraqi, no matter what hes done. You lived with this man for 35 years. You know him. Its just like hes one of the family. I mean, your son is acting in a wrong way, he commits a murder, you still will defend him.
You can feel the humiliation. He humiliated the Iraqis by surrendering himself to the Americans without any fight. Without firing any bullet. Believe me, if Saddam shot one bullet against the Americans or at least killed himself, believe me, 90 percent of the Iraqis will admire him. Because then we will feel he is a man of honor, he is a man who keeps his word. He is a man.
There is another humiliation. Weve been cheated by this man. Amjad explained that Iraqis attributed supernatural powers to Saddam. He could read minds, commune with spirits, use magic to subdue his enemies. They lived in his thrall, they thought, because he was the most powerful man alive. And now, seeing the reality of this man is a disaster for us. Weve been cheated by a worthless man, and weve been ruled by a worthless man.
Iraqis, no matter how they loathed Saddam, took pride in him, Amjad told me. Believe me, all the Arab people, when they hear that you are from Iraq (news – web sites), he will rush to you and gather around and ask about Saddam, saying you should be very proud for having Saddam as your leader. Hes a symbol, hes a star, he defends Palestine. And now, the same people, the same Arab countries see this man handing himself to the Americans.
Its a very humiliating issue. Now they will think all Iraqis are only men of words, without deeds. They say lots of things but do nothing.
Iraqis will, of course, spend the rest of their lives struggling with the meaning of Saddam, while many foreign journalists are trying to reduce it all to simple emotions. This happens all the time. The American occupation is summed up in two kinds of images: the positive — the Saddam statue toppled — and the negative — suicide bombers, looters and U.S. Humvees blown up. But Ive found it impossible to ascribe any single emotion to Iraqis. So much has changed so quickly that they still have no idea what their future will look like or how to take account of their past. The capturing of Saddam is definitive, and, given all the big problems in Iraq now, its also kind of irrelevant. And were just going to have to give Iraqis time to figure out what all of this means.
Adam Davidson is the Iraq correspondent for Minnesota Public Radios Marketplace.
Yan Sham-Shackleton Online 
Extremely interesting article. Thanks for the further insight into the situation.
The one thing that bothered me was the Iraqui’s belief in Saddam having supernatural powers. If the people are as ignorant as that, they’re easier to control. This makes me think lower of Saddam, i had a better image of Iraqui’s in general.
Some people compare Saddam to Hitler. How can you? One is a coward single country dictator, while the other one is a manipulative psychological and militaristic genious.
Another aspect, Saddam did give himself away freely to the Americans. Just shows what kind of a person that he is, a self-centred coward. I would now understand why the Iraqui’s would feel both happy and sad… content and betrayed.
Yet, I understand Saddam even better. He has achieved so much in his life, and he didn’t want it to end, yet. By giving himself away to the Americans, he saved himself. After all, life is about survival… when it comes down to basics.
LikeLike
Pavel. You can make anyone believe anything if you deny them one thing: education.
You cannot look down upon people who did not have oppotunities to free their minds. Instead it’s a fight between those who believe in keeping people in the dark so as you say, easier to control, and those who believe in equal access to information and teach them to think.
Yan
LikeLike
I would say that it is more of an aspect of mentality, not education.
The Iraquis show rather animalistic behaviour.
Here, in Honduras, per example… the education is of a lower level than in Iraq. The poor class, which makes up around 95% of the country gets little to no education.
Yet, the people are not as easily controlled, and there is no dictator here. If the people were that easy to control, a dictator would have arose.
The people in Iraq do lack education, but that is not the main problem in my opinion. The problem is their hateful and violent nature. I might be slighty stereotyping here. Yet, look, at the news, at the articles. Only people of the religion of Islam shoot guns to celebrate, have fundemental militant groups, and reject the Western world. No other culture or religion does those things.
Human nature is not one whole. Each human has his own “nature”. The Iraqui people are easy to control as a whole because they are overwellmed by violence, and by the theoretical expansion of Islam through “unfair” rule and military conquest.
Yes, they are uneducated in what we consider “education”. Yet, they are more focused on religious studies, that’s their “education”… and that’s also thier mistake.
LikeLike
Pavel,
But what about people who believe Jesus has supernatural powers? Are they also victims of a poor education?
Is there an education that extends a people beyond their limit of cultural understanding? are there limits to cultural understanding, a limit, I mean, that people in a culture do not want to go beyond, choosing instead to exist in that culturre in that way?
And what about history? What about in Honduras where Robert Cordova ruled with a bloody fist?
I would think that having a history of dictators in Honduras and Central America has taught the people one thing, and that is they are meant to be ruled. That doesn’t mean that they want to be ruled.
I think it’s an ignorant notion to say that a people are of a violent nature. I think that it has more to do with their conditions.
For example, I know more than a thousand Americans who are not violent, evil, or bent on making more money than the next guy, yet, every year 11,157 Americans die at the hand of a gun. Still doesn’t make me think that the entire culture is violent.
You contradict yourself when you say that people are not of one nature, when you say that Iraqis are taught to be violent by their Islamic studies.
Isn’t the condition of human nature within that notion? That people are taught to be what they are? You are saying that people are taught to be what they are and you are saying people are not taught to be what they are.
What are they, then?
If something other than confused.
LikeLike
Pavel, I will not accept that kind of talk on this site. You cannot talk about a WHOLE people and call them “animalistic.” That’s completely offensive. I ask you to refrain yourself from bigoted retoric, otherwise you will be banned.
Words like this was used for the whole of Africa which lead to justifying one of the most inhumane history of subjugation: Slavery.
This place is about conversation.
I am, NOT impressed.
I am only keeping this on to allow Dfresh to engage you in the hopes you learn to think in better terms.
Yan
LikeLike
In fact, personally, I think as a culture the first world country that I most have problems with in terms of miliataristic thinking, fundemental thinking, and violence in their national policy is ISREAL, even over America. At least the US haven’t for a while gone into other people’s space and knocked down water wells, schools, shot at children and settled for no reason except expansion not even in Iraq.
I would like to think as a people and the historical fact of why the country was created, which was a space for Jewish people to escape presecution would create a society that was respectful for others, yet, it’s one that shows in it’s national policies to not be the case.
I am constantly suprized to hear this kind of rhetoric coming out of people whose history is one of opression, and the same kind of words were used against them at some point that lead to atrocities such as the holocaust. You’re not the first one, it leaves me rather unimpressed with the education system in that country.
However, do all isreali support that kind of thought process. I don’t assume so. But they sure allow fools to rule them too, and they VOTE them in.
Does that allow me or others to make blanket statements about all isrealis? If someone came onto this site and called Jews “animalistic” I think you would have a fit as you should. And I would and dfresh would too.
I have zero patience for that kind of thinking and talk. It’s the very core of all the problems we have in the world today. Creating “others”: differences, along lines of culture, race, gender, nationalities etc.etc. Personally, I think that’s showing a very sad side of human nature.
I suggest you rethink your whole thought process that allows you to make statements such as this. You do not have a sympathetic ear with me.
Yan
LikeLike
You know, Yan (and anyone else that might be reading this), this brings to mind a whole freight of ideas about how people use writing, art and language to communicate ideas.
For instance, in the background I’m listening to “Sex and the City” on the television, and I can’t help but be distracted by the fact that the entire fourth season is all about how women can’t keep boyfriends and how they have “girl” problems. And they talk about penises. Nothing wrong with talking about penises, but they way they talk about them, I’m not sure I can express how it is, a mixture of silliness and disrespect and curiousity. Well, what makes that popular?
Is it popular because it’s true? Or is it popular because so many don’t think it’s true, but they want it to be?
Do women really talk this way because they are women, or because there are shows like this on television that show women talking this way?
Michael Moore asks a similar question when he attacks the media’s representation of black men in the news. When you watch the news and you watch segments on crime in America, guess who’s violent and evil? Black men, according to the media.
I’ve flown on Emirates Air before. Didn’t see a lot of machine guns. Did meet some very respectful men who had intelligent things to say about politics.
One of the most amazing Jewish painters I have ever experienced, Mark Chagall, deals with this, I think, in his own way. He made paintings with the memory of his origins, rather than how the places and people actually were in the moment.
In one of his paintings, he has a man at a table with two faces. I think that this represents how we are inside, two things at once, “what we remember, and what we are remembered as being.”
But this whoole talk of stereotypes is so laughable and old, can’t we all just move on?
LikeLike
I truly apologize for my miss-use of language. You are right, I was not thinking. I actually doubted my own mind while writing that, but ideas kept flowing, in an un-orgonized, “animalistic” manner.
My writing always has, and still does illusrate my mood. I try to regulate it, but when I’m posting late at night, after a hard day, it is not as easy. I was in a bad mood, it does not justify the language i used, but it is an explanation. My sudden stereotypical anger at the Iraquis could be explained by the last suicide bombing in Israel, or just by personal events. Yet again, I am not making excuses, i was wrong. It will not happen again.
To answer some of your points.
d fresh,
“But what about people who believe Jesus has supernatural powers? Are they also victims of a poor education? ”
I can, but will not start a religious debate right now, so i’ll just let that one slide.
“Is there an education that extends a people beyond their limit of cultural understanding? are there limits to cultural understanding, a limit, I mean, that people in a culture do not want to go beyond, choosing instead to exist in that culturre in that way?”
Education helps people understand thier culture. And some culture influences people to get further education and go beyond what th eulture teaches.
Some people do choose to not go beyond, that condition can be labled as “lazyness”. Some people just find themselves uninterested in expanding thier understanding, and are more focused on other aspects of their life. ( i might be contradicting my points in my previous post, but please, give them less value… i myself do not agree with some of what i wrote after re-reading it)
You are right. But the Honduran people did learn that. Wouldn’t you call all the Shajs ( or rulers or kings) in the islamic counties, and area of past Persia/ Babylon dictators as well? Wouldn’t a complete, un-democratic Monarchy be a one man dictatorship? Why didn’t the people learn by then? I’m not trying to single out a specific group such as the Iraquis… take my “violent” argument, and flush it down the toilet, it was innapropriate, wrong, and ignorant. I am just pointing out that people need a hand in learning off experiences.
On the other hand, Saddam did rule practicly one generation of people, people who were loyal to him. The country was balanced, and had no strong need to revult. So, you are right.
“I think it’s an ignorant notion to say that a people are of a violent nature. I think that it has more to do with their conditions.”
You are right. My apologies.
Yes, I did contradict myself.
I would make my point clear, but I cannot follow the same track of thought that i was following the time of the other post.
Yan,
Yet again…sorry.
“In fact, personally, I think as a culture the first world country that I most have problems with in terms of miliataristic thinking, fundemental thinking, and violence in their national policy is ISREAL, even over America. At least the US haven’t for a while gone into other people’s space and knocked down water wells, schools, shot at children and settled for no reason except expansion not even in Iraq. ”
You are looking at this from a completely biased perpective. I will not try to back up Israel’s militaristic thinknig, i do not agree with it, not more than i agree with any of the palestinian militaristic perspectives. Yet, saying that only Israelis do such things, is not telling the entire story.
“I would like to think as a people and the historical fact of why the country was created, which was a space for Jewish people to escape presecution would create a society that was respectful for others, yet, it’s one that shows in it’s national policies to not be the case. ”
Israel, as a state, has never iniciated an official war against any of its neighbors. How can you keep nuetral and peaceful if you are attacked from all sides in an all out war the day after you declare indipendance?
On your other comments. I agree, i was wrong. One should never look at a culture, country, race, etc. as a whole, it is a great human flaw. The key word here is “human”. We are all a part of that strange spicies.
Now, after reading my previous post, i do not agree with what I wrote. This is the one of the first times that this has ever happened to me… such a mislead though process does not happen often with me, but sadly, it does. I should have thought the post over, but it made sense, in someway, when I did post it.
I, like all other people, am prone to mistakes. I did not think of what I wrote, and I am paying for it, I regret posting that, yet, at the same time, I don’t. This criticism i recieved from you has shapen my mind more, made me realize my mistakes, and now, will make me think more and analyze what i write more. I’m grateful to you for not taking my mistake too seriously, and letting me aknowledge and admit it. Thank you.
Yet again, sorry… I’ll try to keep this conversation up, yet, with logical posts.
Pavel
LikeLike
Pavel, I been thinking what to reply.. I think all I can say is I am glad we made you think, and I am glad you’re man enough to admit maybe that’s not the best approach. I think at the end of the day, you came out well Pavel..
Yan
LikeLike