Talk:Human shield action to Iraq

message: This piece is biased in favor of International Leftism.  24.4.63.233 23:19, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: INTERNATIONAL LEFTISM IS GO

message: I think I see what you mean now."There is no conclusive evidence either way as to whether the human shield action to Iraq stopped the U.S. government from bombing civilian infrastructure as they did in 1991," you believe partially implies that there was intent to bomb civilian infrastructure in the 2003 invasion. I'm not sure it does, at worse it implies that bombing of civilian infrastructure was not off the agenda. 
And any case your alternative, "There is no conclusive evidence as to whether the human shield action to Iraq had any effect on U.S. government actions," completely contradicts the next sentence, "... on February 26, 2003, Senior CNN Pentagon Correspondent, Jamie McIntyre commented that the "Pentagon says they will try to work around human shields" as long as they were not deployed to military sites."
So here's an alternative: "There is no conclusive evidence either way as to whether the human shield action to Iraq was a factor in the decision not to bomb much of the civilian infrastructure that was bombed in 1991." —Christiaan 16:26, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It still appears to be a way of slipping in material to bad-mouth prior U.S. actions. And there's no contradiction: someone can say the Pentagon will be affected, and the Pentagon nonetheless may be unaffected. So we'll try again. - Nunh-huh 16:51, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: ??? The whole basis of the strategy to shield these sites was the fact that they had been bombed before! What appears more likely is that there is an effort here to sanitise U.S. actions. —Christiaan 17:39, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And yet your edit summary contends the article isn't about bombing? You seem very confused. - Nunh-huh 18:22, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes my edit summary contends that this article isn't about the bombing of Iraq, which is decribed elsewhere on Wikipedia. You may or may not be aware that this article is in fact about the human shield action to Iraq, of which some strategy was based on the fact that civilian infrastructure had previously being bombed, not how it was bombed, just that it was bombed. —Christiaan 19:02, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yet the fact that "this article" isn't about the bombing of Iraq somehow only prevents mentioning it when it's not phrased the way you insist upon? Your changed sentence doesn't eliminate "bombing" from this article. - Nunh-huh 19:40, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear, the significance of bombing in this article is that it happened and didn't happen. That's it. This is not an article about bombing. —Christiaan 20:03, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure it's my fault, but that doesn't make anything clearer to me. - Nunh-huh 20:16, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is the shields looked to protect sites that were attacked in 1991. That's the reason the 1991 bombing is mentioned. I'm not sure how this can be made any clearer. —Christiaan 20:21, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And most sites that were bombed in 1991 weren't in 2003, but to conclude that that is a result of "human shield action" is an error in logic. - Nunh-huh 20:40, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And of course no such conclusion is made. —Christiaan 21:13, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  intent to bomb civilian infrastructure 

message: I would just like to comment that the use of footnotes and citations here to substantiate comments is absolutely saintly, and should be the standard for all articles on Wikipedia. This sort of thing enables Wikipedia to be a truly useful tool for research. --Peter Farago 16:34, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: (A shame nobody wants to mention the 1991 Humans Shields, but I will defer to you Smart People.)
Everyone has done a nifty job using cites for this article. But I do not see any cite as to the sites being bombed. I seem the recall the Americans hit the power grid with some sort of mylar filaments that took out the system, but could quickly be repaired. (If true, that would make sense. Why blast something you expect to own in a few days?) So is there a cite for the sites being bombed? Paul, in Saudi 10:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Were these targets in fact bombed?

message: As per the MOS, I think the introduction should start with the name of the article in bold type- any comments?
EvocativeIntrigue 16:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: Am I the only one who thinks the writing here is too one-sided? It starts off good, but after a while it seems to deteriorate into
a travel story or something:
:None of the eighty shields who stayed in Baghdad throughout the war were killed or injured. None of the sites where they were residing were destroyed. They were afforded freedom of movement by the government and treated with great warmth by the Iraqi people but largely ignored by the media. This impression that all the shields had fled not only undermined the effectiveness of the action but led to a widespread ridicule. Rather than being portrayed as brave and selfless, a beacon to the world, the shields were instead caricatured as naive and cowardly peaceniks.
I'm not sure if "brave and selfless, a beacon to the world" is an appropriate expression in an NPOV article. (Also, if they were indeed "caricatured as naive and cowardly peaceniks", I think a few references or examples would be in order.)
and later:
: [...] In Basra where there were no human shields, water and power were hit in the first days of the war. Coincidence or an indication that the human shields had some effect?
This sounds like more like an essay than an encyclopedic article to me. -Sesse 10:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an essay, and not a disinterested one: it was written by someone who actually organized the "action". All efforts to bring the article into compliance with WP:NPOV have been met with determined resistance. - Nunh-huh 17:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writing style 

message: What ever happened to the page on Kenneth O'Keefe? Now it just redirects here. The guy is certainly deserving of an entry. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 11:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Don't know why his entry was removed. Had a little dig and found this: http://alohapalestine.com/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.36.2 (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Kenneth O'Keefe?

message: I note that his edit has already been reverted but it should be noted that User:Tjpworldcitizen (who added info about Ken O'Keefe) has self-identified as Ken O'Keefe. Nancy talk 10:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible conflict of interest 

message: "One 21-year-old human shield, Tom Hurndall, left Baghdad for reasons of safety. He went to Palestine where he was shot in the head by an Israeli sniper while working with the International Solidarity Movement."
This part of the article is lacking a source.
Also, I'm somewhat new to begin involved in Wikipedia.  While I read the talk page guidelines, I would appreciate any feedback regarding how to participate in article discussions.
85.159.160.205 (talk) 12:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of Source for Tom Hurndall 

message: The "to" is awkward, can we come up with a better name?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:05, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  strange naming 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Human shield action to Iraq. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100613065419/http://sandiego.indymedia.org:80/en/2002/12/3533.shtml to http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2002/12/3533.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060427023532/http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com:80/TRANSCRIPTS/0302/26/mlld.00.html to http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0302/26/mlld.00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20030702201251/http://sf.indymedia.org:80/news/2003/03/1579215.php to http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/03/1579215.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified