Z, RE: "a couple of the local talk show hosts were discussing the fact that the media hasn't been mentioning the Iraqi casualties, and these hosts attributed that to a desire not to equate high numbers of "dead Iraqis" with victory, like was done by the media during Vietnam. It made sense to me.-Z "
A body count doesn't translate into victory - it means we're having trouble winning the people.
It also implies the USA is murdering 10,000 people per year. My goodness. This was something I didn't realize. Why are we doing this? Are terrorists even in Iraq? Our country has not been given a consistent reason for the invasion of Iraq. You don't kill 10,000 people without a communicated reason as to why such an action might save more lives in the long-term. I think Americans are sufficiently intelligent enough to be given more information, and not kept in the dark like some communist regime.
The USA cannot do a repeat of what it did during Bush Sr's presidency - where he abandoned Iraq after promising the Iraqi people he would overthrow SH where they supported him, but then Bush Sr deserted them and so the Iraqi people that supported Bush Sr were mass murdered. You don't give your word to someone, and then abandon them to die. That's like murdering them yourself.
But I think the media is hiding the number of Iraqi's the USA is murdering maybe because the govt is influencing them to withhold this information. I suspect they are fearful this information will make people want to end the war because they will feel horribly guilty about their country murdering tens of thousands of people. And who wouldn't? It certainly makes me feel extremely squeamish they are murdering ten thousand people. Here I incorrectly assumed it was a tiny small number. It's disgusting not to be told. And frankly, it makes me feel distrustful of the media. Manipulated by the govt.
It's also concerning because Americans overall tend to be a here-and-now crowd. They get this news and they might say enough - and want to pull out - and the result might even be more Iraqi's killed just like what reportedly happened when the USA pulled out the first time and abandoned their supporters.
I think the govt needs to provide the public with a life-cost ratio analysis: how many less people will get killed if we stay vs if we go. And also, an explanation as to why the USA invaded Iraq in the first place. And their estimate for how long this will continue, the estimated number of deaths, the cost in Iraqi and USA soldiers lives, and the potential cost to the safety of the USA if we depart. How exactly does taking over Iraq provide the USA with more safety?
I think the USA needs to communicate its plans better. What exactly is the govt's plans to get Iraq back onto their own feet, with some semblance of self-government? To what extent have we mitigated terrorist threats by attacking Iraq, if at all?
Regards,
Amy J |
