Check out this link
OK, this is another journalist writing on the war in Iraq. I guess I look at it in a few ways--1) Iraq is unsafe, or 2) Iraq is UNSAFE, or 3) HOLY SHIT THEY'RE SHOOTING AT US AND WE ARE GOING TO DIE IN THIS HELL HOLE !#$%$!!!
I mean, I guess now that I think about it, Iraq is all three. The hard part is, getting you, the reader, to understand exactly when you are at 1, 2, or 3.
For you see, the average journalist would have you to believe that Iraq is always number 3. From my point of view, it really isn't, but maybe I'm just used to it now. I mean, I'm not in Baghdad, so I can't speak to the specifics. BUT, I am in al Anbar province, in the Sunni Triangle, and where I am is considered "one of the most dangerous areas of the country" including the comforting "near the epicenter of the insurgency."
So I feel qualified to at least comment on his Tuesday diary.
Yes, Iraq is a war zone. Yes, people die every day. Yes, the media sell only the gruesome parts of the story (for the most part-sorry if I have offended any journalists out there).
The problem is--when you hear automatic gunfire that isn't aimed at you or in your vicinity, you aren't at #3 from above. You're at #1, for sure, and depending on who you are and how long you have been in Iraq, you may be at #2, but unless rounds are impacting around you and you know that the insurgents are shooting at you, you're nowhere near #3---the person getting shot at is at #3, but you aren't.
So yes, at anyone time, people all around the country are experiencing the very intimate #3. But sometimes, that automatic gunfire is a trigger happy Iraqi soldier (or insurgent, or Iraqi citizen-every Iraqi citizen is allowed an AK-47 for self-defense) that just wants to shoot off some rounds. That's #1. OR, it's an Iraqi Soldier shooting rounds at a vehicle that got a little too close for comfort, but isn't an insurgent-it's just a warning to steer clear-that's probably #2. You know without a doubt, when you've come across #3.
What does this long winded explanation mean? It means take the journalist with a grain of salt. He lives in a heavily guarded, fortress of a hotel in the Green Zone, and never leaves unless he gets a little hall pass to go over to some other bunker and write a story. Anytime he hears gunshots, he's probably already at #3, and he wants to make you, the reader, sitting on your couch, go all the way to #3, so that he sells a lot of stories.
Where I am, we walk around town a lot, we got to schools and hand out book bags and soccer balls to the kids, we drive down the roads a lot, and in over 2 months, I've only experienced #3 once (that sucked, BTW). And #2, maybe a handful of times (like mortar attacks). Most of the time, only #1, and if I am not careful, I slink back into complaceny, an area I'll call #0.5, where I may forget for a moment or two that people want to kill me out there, because I'm thinking about Steelers football, or a great piece of pumpkin pie, or Guinness on draft, or a chick wearing a wrap around skirt and Jimmy Choo's, or whatever pops into my head at the time.
So, maybe I'm just indifferent to the violence, but maybe, just maybe, the journalist is overly cautious and aware of his mortality (True, Baghdad is dangerous, and there can be a shitload of explosions at times in the city, but again-these are far away, a #3 for the participants, but not this guy).
Whoa, this post is not succint at all, hope I didn't confuse you.
OK, this is another journalist writing on the war in Iraq. I guess I look at it in a few ways--1) Iraq is unsafe, or 2) Iraq is UNSAFE, or 3) HOLY SHIT THEY'RE SHOOTING AT US AND WE ARE GOING TO DIE IN THIS HELL HOLE !#$%$!!!
I mean, I guess now that I think about it, Iraq is all three. The hard part is, getting you, the reader, to understand exactly when you are at 1, 2, or 3.
For you see, the average journalist would have you to believe that Iraq is always number 3. From my point of view, it really isn't, but maybe I'm just used to it now. I mean, I'm not in Baghdad, so I can't speak to the specifics. BUT, I am in al Anbar province, in the Sunni Triangle, and where I am is considered "one of the most dangerous areas of the country" including the comforting "near the epicenter of the insurgency."
So I feel qualified to at least comment on his Tuesday diary.
Yes, Iraq is a war zone. Yes, people die every day. Yes, the media sell only the gruesome parts of the story (for the most part-sorry if I have offended any journalists out there).
The problem is--when you hear automatic gunfire that isn't aimed at you or in your vicinity, you aren't at #3 from above. You're at #1, for sure, and depending on who you are and how long you have been in Iraq, you may be at #2, but unless rounds are impacting around you and you know that the insurgents are shooting at you, you're nowhere near #3---the person getting shot at is at #3, but you aren't.
So yes, at anyone time, people all around the country are experiencing the very intimate #3. But sometimes, that automatic gunfire is a trigger happy Iraqi soldier (or insurgent, or Iraqi citizen-every Iraqi citizen is allowed an AK-47 for self-defense) that just wants to shoot off some rounds. That's #1. OR, it's an Iraqi Soldier shooting rounds at a vehicle that got a little too close for comfort, but isn't an insurgent-it's just a warning to steer clear-that's probably #2. You know without a doubt, when you've come across #3.
What does this long winded explanation mean? It means take the journalist with a grain of salt. He lives in a heavily guarded, fortress of a hotel in the Green Zone, and never leaves unless he gets a little hall pass to go over to some other bunker and write a story. Anytime he hears gunshots, he's probably already at #3, and he wants to make you, the reader, sitting on your couch, go all the way to #3, so that he sells a lot of stories.
Where I am, we walk around town a lot, we got to schools and hand out book bags and soccer balls to the kids, we drive down the roads a lot, and in over 2 months, I've only experienced #3 once (that sucked, BTW). And #2, maybe a handful of times (like mortar attacks). Most of the time, only #1, and if I am not careful, I slink back into complaceny, an area I'll call #0.5, where I may forget for a moment or two that people want to kill me out there, because I'm thinking about Steelers football, or a great piece of pumpkin pie, or Guinness on draft, or a chick wearing a wrap around skirt and Jimmy Choo's, or whatever pops into my head at the time.
So, maybe I'm just indifferent to the violence, but maybe, just maybe, the journalist is overly cautious and aware of his mortality (True, Baghdad is dangerous, and there can be a shitload of explosions at times in the city, but again-these are far away, a #3 for the participants, but not this guy).
Whoa, this post is not succint at all, hope I didn't confuse you.
posted by Chairborne Stranger at 2:21 AM
3 Comments:
The journalist really do make it sound scary over there. I was watching the nightly news and it showed the 82nd airborne going house to house looking for insurgents and car bombs. I thought of you and Justin hoped for your safety.
Justin is coming home on the 17th to get married but then he's going back.
Keep up the writing. You're a good writer and I find your take on things fascinating and entertaining to read.
I'm glad to hear from you that it's not as bad as we are hearing from the press.
Have a good day, stay safe.
Kathy
Nice post.
Airborne.
Delta 2-505 P.I.R.
'94-'97
So you don't recommend Baghdad as a honeymoon destination? Just kidding. That journalist is just selling stories and to do that they have to sensationalize everything. Stay safe.
Post a Comment
<< Home