October 6, 2004
-
Topic: 13,000 dead
I will post on education and my project soon, however, this statistic has just been lodged into the “holy shit!!!” part of my brain.
‘At least 13,000 Iraqi civilians have died so far. (If the data for the Iraqi dead is incomplete, it is because the U.S. government has consistently refused to tally the civilian death toll.)’
from the website: http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/20092/
I usually read articles quickly, and numbers fly by. But, 13,000 civilians. What started this whole thing was about 3,000 US civilians. I saw that number 13,000, and I froze staring at it for a few minutes. 3,000 justifies our country going to war. 3,000 justifies our country to be afraid of terrorists. 3,000 justifies much mourning. But 13,000. What does that justify. Now, I question more than ever. I could be making the error in trusting this news source, but 13,000 innocent Iraqis. Take away the connotation of what Iraq is, the country of evil, the country of Saddam, the country of terrorists. That’s 13,000 people just like anyone reading this. Children. Parents. Students. I’m sitting in this beautiful first class library on campus, w/ superfast internet, and the freedom to do just about anything i want with the rest of my day.
Bill Maher called this a “luxury war.” And it is. I feel nothing of those 13,000 lives, and the 1000+ American lives. George Carlin was on his show, and said “this war, like every war, is a war of rich men of an ownership society trying to protect what they have by sending the young to die.” We’re starting to see how thin our troops are, and when the question was asked, how would America respond to a draft, the response by Maher was, “then we’d really see that people aren’t interested in this war.” If i don’t watch tv, and don’t follow the news, the war is not a part of my reality. For many, even following the war, does not make it part of their reality, because the only Americans who are really feeling this war are primarily the poor who have been sent over to fight this war, so the rich can maintain their lifestyle.
If they found WMD, I wonder if the criticisms of Bush would be as strong. If they found links between Saddam and 9/11, I wonder if the criticisms of Bush would be as strong. If Iraq was actually transformed into a peaceful society by getting rid of Saddam, I wonder how liberals would still have a strong criticism of Iraq. I sometimes think liberals would still attack Bush even if all these things were true. But I guess it doesn’t matter, since none of them are. If we’re to believe the media, this one’s going to be close. Cross your fingers.
Comments (6)
I hope that Kerry goes for the fact that Bush has not really had took his eye off Bin Laden by going into Iraq
ownership society is critical to understanding the why in Iraq from my view…
The whole Bush idea of “cost free war” is so repugnant. No nation should ever sacrifice it’s soldiers, especially not in a “war of choice” without universal sacrifice. It was grotesque in 1968 that Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, and yes, even Bill Clinton (who at least honestly opposed the war) got to live the high life while John Kerry and million other American kids got shot at, maimed, and killed for absolutely nothing. It’s even more groteque now to find anti-draft, anti-tax, but pro-war Americans. They are disgusting hypocrits with no respect at all for our soldiers.
Saying the war would have been justified had it been justified makes no sense. Germany would have been right to attack Poland in 1939 if Poland had attacked Germany, but they didn’t. And Saddam had no weapons, no connection to 9/11, was no threat to anyone in 2002, and we attacked. Killed 13,000, maybe 30,000 Iraqis, destroyed a country, created a terrorist theme park, lost more than a thousand US troops, maimed another 5,000. Dick Cheney just figured out last night that Iraqis have died. He’s still said not one word about the US dead and injured.
I just re-watched Fahrenheit 9/11 last night. The first time I saw it, I said I should watch it at least once a week until the election. The problem is that as a person, I lose interest in things quickly. There’s no need to explain why this phenomenon happens, but, it’s way too easy to go from, “Wow, Bush does not deserve another 4-years, at all,” to, “Is Seinfeld on yet?” And I love Seinfeld, but that shouldn’t push out of my mind the reality of our world.
Probably the creepiest thing about 9/11 is Bush’s demeanor on film. When you compare his confiedence when in front of a national tv audience, or in front of a crowd, to his deameanor otherwise, it’s absolutely scary. When he throws out his line “we will get the terrorists,” then says, “watch my golf swing.” that’s scary. When he says, “I don’t really no where osama is, but i don’t worry about things like that,” that was scary. When he’s asked about his coalition of the willing, all he can say is, “oh…you’ll find out.”
All he’s saying really, is “I don’t know what’s going on.” He almost convinced me again during the debate that we really do have allies, but then you realize that while he is right, there are countries who are technically fighting with us, what he really knows is that these countries are “barely supporting us in any tangible way with troops.”
Regardless of bias, the raw footage alone is enough to make me push all my friends who haven’t seen the movie to see it. To see more of what Micahel Moore is doing, check out his website, http://www.michaelmoore.com
He’s currently being prosecuted for trying to get slackers to vote by giving them free underwear.
Well Moore’s not being prosecuted and won’t be. Just as in NYC where all the protestors will have their cases dropped, this is just another Republican attempt to silence free speech.
Thanks for your really thought out response. I’d feel completely different about Bush if he had fired SOMEBODY. Obviously (as The Times has said editorially) Condoleeza Rice who (a) refused to coordinate intelligence pre-9/11, thus leaving us very vulnerable. Surely Rumsfeld who needs to take the fall for over-ruling army planners on troop needs. Probably Cheney for trumpeting false data. It’s not just the CIA or Energy, it’s how this was put together at the top.
The biggest problem is that we can’t trust Bush & Company to tell the truth about anything. I mean I understand Clinton lying about sex (everyone lies about sex). I understand that when Nixon lied he wanted to stay out of jail. That makes sense. But Bush will lie about how he fell off a bicycle, Cheney will lie about meeting Edwards. It’s pathological, and very scary.
The next biggest thing is we can never be safe as an avenging force. I learned this early as a cop: make friends with everyone possible. You don’t want to be in trouble out there and have everyone turn off their lights and choose not to help. Our strategy since 9/11 has made us the most hated nation on earth. That’s not fair but we’ve chosen to do that. The next attack will not provoke much sympathy, nor cooperation. People will say, “they deserve it” and “we tried to help before and they screwed us.” I found it completely entertaining that Bush was complaining about Kerry saying “wrong war” while depending on countries he’s insulted monthly to provide most of the troops in Afghanistan.
Bush is like an angry, uneducated 11-year-old. He bullies, threatens, lies, creates his own havoc, then blames everyone but himself. The fact that half of America supports him says way too much about our own maturity level as a nation.
I think that’s the one thing bush hasn’t pointed out. He keeps making the point that we can’t let foreign lands dictate our policies. and his way of saying it, and the fact that so far kerry hasn’t made much of a fuss about it, has allowed Bush to hijack, for lack of a better word, the debate on foreign relations.
We need foreign help in Iraq. And surely, in the years to come, we’re going to need foreign help in some other way. We have lost the sympathy of the world.
Tom. night, here at Wash U., I hope Kerry can help translate what Bush is saying, so the avg. Joe can begin to see through the rhetoric.