| | | All civilian deaths are reprehensible, but I have to say, I do not recall the same outrage when over a near 20-year period, over 200,000 Iraqi civilians were killed while the country was under US occupation.
The way the US media is portraying the Ukraine conflict is far different than how they portrayed other conflicts in which the US was the aggressor.
I mean, where was the outrage when the US used a drone strike to kill an entire wedding procession in Yemen?
hrw.org
Of course, there was the US airstrike that killed 37 civilians, mostly women and children, in Afghanistan in 2008:
en.wikipedia.org
There is also a big wedding party in Iraq in 2004 the US hit with an airstrike, killing 42-civilians:
en.wikipedia.org
That's just weddings. Few on SI gave a rip about these things. Why? You'd have to search people's souls to get that answer.
War combatants do horrific things during wars, but somehow it's coming across that what Russia is doing is some kind of new, unique, and beastly warfare.
If anything, they've taken a page out of the US playbook and have been trying to limit the civilian casualties, unlike how they approached things when they occupied Afghanistan in the 80's and just killed and maimed anything and everything.
I'm not saying I approve of what Russia's doing. I'm saying the coverage of this is so 180-degrees different from when the US was the aggressor that it calls into question the ability of the media to be objective in their reporting. I think we can see the major media is about surfing public opinion for dollars, and not what has historically been known as journalism. |
|
