This AP piece appeared on the websites of both the Herald and the Globe today, and the way the story was framed shows, I think, how little respect the authors and/or editors have for the intelligence of the audience. By what idiotic logic is this good news, I wonder? Naturally, the commenters on Boston.com and elsewhere suggested that whoever is handling or enabling the US propaganda effort had not in fact erred in their assessment of the U.S. public’s perspicacity. Some partisan dupes used this “good news” to defend Obama’s “surgical” war, while the usual monsters and psychopaths, convinced that nobody in the Middle East is actually human, called for still more civilian deaths. Practically everybody was tricked by the way the AP’s editors presented the findings, as “fewer civilian casualties than was thought” by some unknown portion of an undefined sample.
Tempted to think of Ron Paul’s use of the “Golden Rule”? How would the American people react if 30% of the casualties caused by police were innocent men, women, children? Fact is that we are, too, as savage and barbaric as any tribe. We just have more expensive weapons.
We, with our long history of crimes, have the right to kill all enemies, real or imagined? Maybe we should examine the faces of our enemies before we scalp them.
“Politics have no relation to morals.” –Niccolo Machiavelli
Let’s try again.
Imagine the may Americans who felt very strongly that we needed to remove Bush as president, (Republicans can insert Obama), and the Muslims decided to help us out.
Yea, except foreigners intentions may not be entirely trusted, especially when we have some historical reasons to be wary.
Their help consists of bombing us, ugh – and occupying our country. Foreign soldiers standing armed on our street corners. This might be enough to get the liberals and conservatives to finally work together. Liberal militias?
NOW add they are killing 1 innocent civilian for every militia member or dissident killed. Well they might consider Bishop ??? or Congressman ??? or the local police chief a threat, no matter how they much they are respected.
Peace was never restored in Ireland as long as it was occupied. Occupation didn’t work in Vietnam. Israel has occupied the Palestinian’s for a bit.
If we really plan to remain in Afghanistan till there is peace we will be there forever.
I’ve heard from former infantry soldiers that the standard patrol in towns of Iraq or Afghanistan went like this:
The soldiers go to a house, break in.
Point their weapons and holler threats at the family members while trashing the house until they’re told where the insurgents are. The homies aren’t going to give up any family or maybe don’t know where any insurgents are, so they lie.
They tattle on the family that they have a grudge with or are jealous of, or don’t know too well.
The soldiers pretend to believe them (they have to justify their time) and go to the other house, break down the door, terrorize the inhabitants, trash it and find nothing.
Repeat next patrol.
Who would love these foreign invaders? What will you do then the authorities come to your house and demand to know where the insurgents are?
“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.” –Dwight David Eisenhower
…but it IS good news if this represents an improvement or if it is a lesser rate than we thought.
The problem with the marketing phrase “surgical strike” is that it doesn’t just promise a lower (but unacceptable) slaughter of civilians. It seems to promise to spare civilians entirely. It is tempting to have a lot of them.
And so a lot more innocents die as a result.