jamotto Posted April 18, 2005 Report Posted April 18, 2005 Link quote:By Colin McMahon Tribune foreign correspondent Marla Ruzicka should have left Iraq last week. But there was too much work, too little time and too many Iraqis who had been maimed, widowed or orphaned by a conflict they did not invite but could not avoid. Vacation could wait, Ruzicka said. The little Iraqi boy whose leg was blown off could not. So Ruzicka stayed. And on Saturday, Ruzicka died, killed by a car bomb that was not aimed at her but took her just the same. Along with an Iraqi colleague, the 28-year-old Californian became the very figure she had gone to Iraq to help: a civilian casualty of war. "She went from being just an anti-war activist to someone who realized that the war was a reality and that people needed to be helped because of it," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) (D-Vt.), who credited Ruzicka with helping secure U.S. government funds to compensate Iraqi and Afghan civilians hurt by U.S. military operations. "You hear of that occasional thing where one person makes a real difference," Leahy said. "This is an example. She accomplished what large organizations don't accomplish. ... In my mind she is a real hero." What Ruzicka accomplished was simple in principle but dangerous and difficult in practice: She identified Afghan and Iraqi families who had been hurt by U.S. military actions and then helped them get medical care or financial aid. This was not just filling out forms. In Iraq, Ruzicka worked with local doctors, hospitals and tribal leaders as well as with the U.S. military authorities that controlled the aid. She lobbied policymakers in Washington. She charmed and needled donors in New York and San Francisco. And Ruzicka badgered reporters to do stories on her, knowing that an article or television piece about this young and endearing woman would bring donations to her group, the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict. She wound up on network television and in publications as varied as The Washington Post and Elle magazine. To her friends Ruzicka was full of both humanitarian impulses and human frailties. She was something of a tortured soul, a friend said Sunday. But she was famous for arranging parties that would throb with salsa music and tip toward chaos. "She has no guile," said Catherine Philp, a foreign correspondent for the Times of London. "She has a pure sweetness and goodness that is totally inspiring, and I don't think she ever realized that." Ruzicka's highs were unmatchable, torrents of words and energy and productivity. Her lows brought friends and family to exhaustion as they fought to pull her back to her feet. Ruzicka took medication and underwent therapy to find the right balance, and in a recent e-mail to a friend she wrote: "i can deal with this illness. there will be good days and bad days--i just gotta fight them with love." Iraqis were sometimes taken aback by Ruzicka's mix of flower child and union steward. She passed out hugs to security guards. She called senior military officers "dude." She belittled governmental programs as too slow to provide aid and too complicated for the average Iraqi. Other aid workers and some reporters considered her methods inappropriate and overbearing. But families who were helped by Ruzicka spoke of her as an angel. And the money she raised bought enough shoestrings to keep running CIVIC, as her group was known. Aryeh Neier, president of George Soros' Open Society Institute, personally approved a grant of $60,000 to fund CIVIC last year. Just this month, in a decision that made Ruzicka giddy with gratitude, Neier renewed the grant. He praised Ruzicka for finding "the right tone" to win the military's cooperation and for "making them conscious of the suffering of the families with casualties." "On the one hand, Marla had this very naive quality about her, which made me wonder whether she would be effective," Neier said. "On the other hand she had a very direct quality. In a sense her naivete seemed to work to her advantage." What was naivete and what was fearlessness is hard to say. She and her twin brother, Mark, were the youngest of six children in a family growing up in Lakeport, Calif., north of San Francisco. Her brother told the Los Angeles Times that in 1991, when Marla was in 8th grade, she was suspended after leading a protest against the Persian Gulf war. In high school, the 5-foot-3 Ruzicka was a star three-point shooter on the basketball team. A firebrand leftist protester in her teens and early 20s, Ruzicka was once dragged away by police while trying to disrupt a speech by George W. Bush. But in her mid-20s, she became almost overnight a woman who could address authority without always confronting it. She put aside stunts. She talked to power. "She came to D.C. without knowing anything about how things work here," said Tim Rieser, an aide to Leahy who drew on Ruzicka's work in putting together a program to provide $10 million in U.S. funds to compensate civilian casualties. "What Marla wanted to do was help innocent families, and she would work with anyone who could help her," Rieser said. "She was not blaming anyone. She was finding ways to get a kid airlifted to a hospital in Germany." On Saturday, Ruzicka had plowed through a morning of interviews before checking in with a friend around 2 p.m., a common method for foreigners to keep track of one another in a country rife with kidnappings. She and her Iraqi associate, Faiz Ali Salim, wanted to follow up on an Iraqi family and would squeeze in one more meeting. But an hour later, the violence of Iraq that Ruzicka had tried so hard to mitigate struck. As the two traveled Baghdad's dangerous airport road, a suicide car bomber attacked a nearby convoy of armored vehicles belonging to a different non-governmental organization. The blast killed Ruzicka and Salim, a 43-year-old pilot for Iraqi Airways who had taken a leave from his job to help Ruzicka this month. A European security guard with the other agency also died. Ruzicka's funeral is scheduled for Saturday in Lakeport. "With Marla there are always a couple of more interviews that should be done," Leahy said. "She never talked as if her job was finished. There would always be more to be done."
Soback Posted April 20, 2005 Report Posted April 20, 2005 "So Ruzicka stayed. And on Saturday, Ruzicka died, killed by a car bomb that was not aimed at her but took her just the same. Along with an Iraqi colleague, the 28-year-old Californian became the very figure she had gone to Iraq to help: a civilian casualty of war." How about NOT a civilian casualty or war, but ANOTHER casualty of terrorism, or was it US troops that drove that car bomb?
Guest Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by nomad: That's not the issue. The point is that the US is soo much there to help the iraqis that they officially don't count civilian casualties who die in a process initiated by the coalition. They don't count civilians killed by terrorists like they don't count civilians they erroneously target. What make the coalition so different from Saddam in this aspect ? That is EXACTLY the Issue Nomad, she was killed by Terrorists. And the difference between Saddam and the US? Around 970,000 casualties? Best REAL estimate of casualties during this little war is around 30K, most killed by Terrorist bombs, IED etc, around 5K due to the invasion itself in the last 2 years. In 20 come odd years, Saddam was able to kill close to 1 million people, and a good chunk of them his own citizens killed by HIS terror squads. Also, 70% of the country now has full time electricity, sewer, water, etc, compared to less then 20% with Saddam, an ACTUAL elected government, compared to "vote for Saddam or die".... Etc, etc, ad nauseum..... Please, get a grip on reality.... Thanks
Guest Remo Williams Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:That's not the issue. The point is that the US is soo much there to help the iraqis that they officially don't count civilian casualties who die in a process initiated by the coalition. Why is it Europe has more or less turned their back on the Iraqi people when they obviously need help from the world not just the states. The majority of them want a democratic political system now that they have a choice. Yet the assistance most of Europe is providing them is laughable. quote: They don't count civilians killed by terrorists like they don't count civilians they erroneously target. What make the coalition so different from Saddam in this aspect ?You mean the way every military in the world erroneously targets civilians during times of conflict or are we just focusing on the US military and ignoring the rest as far as this procedure goes? Oh and that comparison your attempting to make between Saddam and the US is belittling of your intelligence sir, and some may find it down right insulting.
LostInSpace Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by nomad: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...sp?story=631173 quote: A number is important not only to quantify the cost of war, but as a reminder of those whose dreams will never be realised in a free and democratic Iraq. Jeez, the same can be said for any conflict from the begining of history. quote: In my two years in Iraq, the one question I am asked the most is: "How many Iraqi civilians have been killed by American forces?" The American public has a right to know how many Iraqis have lost their lives since the start of the war and as hostilities continue. Why? I don't need to know the exact amount. I do know there are plenty of civilian casualties. As in any conflict. If people worried about that, the liberation of Europe during WWII would never have gotten off the ground. Do we know the exact amount of civilian casualties during WWII? I don't think so.
Guest Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by LostInSpace: quote:Originally posted by nomad: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...sp?story=631173 quote: A number is important not only to quantify the cost of war, but as a reminder of those whose dreams will never be realised in a free and democratic Iraq. Jeez, the same can be said for any conflict from the begining of history. quote: In my two years in Iraq, the one question I am asked the most is: "How many Iraqi civilians have been killed by American forces?" The American public has a right to know how many Iraqis have lost their lives since the start of the war and as hostilities continue. Why? I don't need to know the exact amount. I do know there are plenty of civilian casualties. As in any conflict. If people worried about that, the liberation of Europe during WWII would never have gotten off the ground. Do we know the exact amount of civilian casualties during WWII? I don't think so. The total estimates for WWII are as follows. Civilians: 32,355,000 Military: 20,882,000 Total: 53,237,000 According to Iraqibodycount. Minimum death count is: 20,117 Maximum death count is: 22,851 Total US military deaths: 1,734 total: between 21,851 and 24,585 Total Saddam deaths in Iraq Estimated civilian deaths by death squads: 600,000 Estimated deaths in war with Iran: 500,000 Total death count of Saddam Hussien: 1,100,000 or 70 per day of his 8000 day rule. so, in 730 days 33 per day have died, about HALF of what Saddam killed PER day of his 8000 day rule. So, 33 a day, most of which have been killed by TERRORISTS, or 70 a day under Saddam. Hmm, as an Iraqi, which would I rather have? Any death is terrible, but when we have cut that death rate in half, and that death rate is FALLING, then I would have to say, we are doing pretty darn good....
LostInSpace Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: Any death is terrible, but when we have cut that death rate in half, and that death rate is FALLING, then I would have to say, we are doing pretty darn good.... Most whole heartedly agreed on that point.
Darkling Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by nomad: Remo: ... Then add 1 million casualties due to the UN embargo during these last 10 years ... Are you kidding me!!! When the US invaded, they found over a BILLION Dollars in CASH. And that's just what they FOUND, there were Billions more put aside to fund the current rebellion going on over there, you think these guys got their weapons for free? Saddam STARVED his own people so he could hoard BILLIONS, during this time he built a home that was a MILE long, do you know how much it costs to build a home that's a MILE long!?! In addition he paid the Germans Hundreds of Millions to put a Bunker under the house before it was built. Then he turns around and Proclaims, This US Led Embargo is killing our people and starving them to death. And of course, YOU BELIEVE HIM! This one fact alone shows your utter lack of intelligence and ability draw your own conclusion. Just becuase the Media wants to sell you this garbage doesn't mean that you should buy into it.
Guest Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 Oh please Nomad, ENOUGH!!! You blame us, we blame Saddam.... We gave him every opportunity to feed his people, and he instead used that money from that UN bungled program to steal money and build himself palaces etc. If the UN had been doing it's job, instead of stealing from the kitty, those people would NOT have died. The million people that you claim died, died as a DIRECT result of the UN's corruptness. And Arrafat, the terrorist, who was still KILLING Israeli citizens up to the day of his death also won a Nobel prize, so to give that ANY type of credibility is a joke. The nobel prize is now given to those who are political allies if the committee. For God's sake, Jimmy Carter won a Nobel prize, JIMMY CARTER? COME ON!!!
street228 Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 Tell em, like it really is...NOMAD!! I love it....just had to say AMEN, to nomad and his presentation..."REALITY"!!
LostInSpace Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by nomad: You are mixing issues. Since when have embargoes ever induced the fall of a dictatorial regime ? Name a single occurrence. It's the population that mainly suffers. I probably don't have to say that to you, with Cuba in front of your nose and Castro laughing at your 10 successive Presidents since 1959... Among this 1 million casualties caused by the UN embargoes, approximately 500'000 correspond to children according to the UNICEF. It's such garbage info, to use your own words, that on May 12th 1996, in the CBS show "60 minutes" Leslie Stahl asked to the Secretary of State Madeleine Albright if the price of 500000 dead children as a result of the sanctions was worth it, she replied, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it." Now of course, a neocon would probably just have said "I have no information on this"... The fact is that the situation was so bad, that Mr. Denis Halliday, probably another garbage in your views (who still got nominated for the 2001 Nobel Price), former UN Assistant Secretary-General and UN Humanitarian Co-ordinator in Iraq, resigned after 30 years at the UN as protest against the economic sanctions who caused an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/183499.stm Exactly what I've said before SANCTIONS DON'T WORK!! Best to just go in and get it over with right then and there. We could have saved the citizens of Iraq 10+ years of grief if we took care of saddam once and for all in the first gulf war. The Cuban issue is another joke and the pussy footin around with that. However, Castro does not have much longer to go and when he does the power vacum that's going to occur will probably cause a civil war there (with the different factions vying for control of Cuba) and that's when the U.S. will act behind the scenes. Sure Castro may revel in his time but in the end he will be forgotten as the despot and the flea speck that he is.
Guest Remo Williams Posted April 21, 2005 Report Posted April 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by street: Tell em, like it really is...NOMAD!! I love it....just had to say AMEN, to nomad and his presentation..."REALITY"!! Now thats funny!
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now