Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Vengeance

25,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the war in Iraq.

_41319923_civilian_deaths3_pie203 _41319877_civilian_victims4_pie203

What are we doing?! "Acceptable loss" only applies when one chooses to objectify human life. (Opinion, not fact.)

Gimme your opinion, even if it's contrary. But, make it constructive. I want to understand how this is okay.

5 comments:

kris said...

I can't help you. I don't understand how this is ok. :(

Anonymous said...

Some might say "well only %3 are even children." Unless it is your 3-17 yr old.

c said...

It's not an acceptable loss to me.

I'm right there with you.

Poppy said...

Ah, statistics! Hard numbers. Thanks, James. I'm kinda hoping one day, with Saddam out of power, the number of Iraqi civilian deaths goes down to just the number who die from natural causes or accidents. five thousand lives is still 5,000 too many to me.

I see your point, am glad that Saddam is no longer in power, but I shudder to think of the reverse scenario - where the world saw us as evil (oh, they do!) and George Bush as an evil dictator (yup, they do!) so they push him out of power and kill 5,000 of us each year.

Poppy said...

I wasn't trying to drag the point the other way. I have frstratingly muddled and unknowledeable thoughts about this war. I really appreciate that you're taking the time to explain the facts. I actually pressed my send button while I was being asked to hurry up and finish getting ready for work so we could carpool. I doubt if I had not had the time constraint I would have left that "America is evil" bit in there. It's leftover frustration from a conversation a co-worker (who was in the Army) and I have about George W. Bush being tried for war crimes because he is a war criminal (her words, not my own). Sorry that my flippant reply did just what you said, and removed the focus away from the original information. (Excuses, excuses, I know.)

If you had been my "interpretter" of the war's cause, effect, and progression I think I would have understood a lot better why we were there in the first place and why we have been perhaps tricked into thinking the war isn't necessary. If there is a reason for us to be there, I am happy that we are. I am surrounded by people who see no good reason to be in Iraq. I am sheltered from all the world's corruption, so you're opening my eyes.

And, I just need to say this to the rest of the crowd - James has provided constructive criticism and a clear point of view without just doing a drive-by "you're just stupid" blast. This is the type of comment I actually like to see! Thanks, again, James for taking the time to explain to those of us who aren't aware of these facts. As you see by the other comments listed here, a lot of us are confused and angered by our continued presence in Iraq and the politics behind it. Definitely helps to have you articulate the corrupt reasons why organizations are telling us to pull out.

I do have three more questions, because you happen to have a well-formed opinion.

1. If we went into Iraq because Bush suspected that there were weapons of mass destruction even after it was determined that there were not such weapons in the initial investigation, were we justified in going to war and taking Saddam out of power? I feel/think that the reason for going to war was a lie, and I have a hard time accepting our infiltration into Iraqi society based on what I perceive as a lie.

2. Why aren't we focusing on Osama bin Laden if he was the mastermind behind September 11?

3. How can we ever "win" the war on terror?

I've read this over a few times, I think it says what I want to.