|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 7 new of 166 responses total. |
pvn
|
|
response 160 of 166:
| 
Aug 30 08:21 UTC 2003 |
More children will die this year in the US because of the existance of
swimming pools than all the Iraqi civilians killed by our military
during GulfWar-II. In the US a child is way more likely to be killed by
a swimming pool than firearms. And more US citizens will die by
automobile this year than the total US KIA in the vietnam war. (We need
automobile control, not gun control!)
|
mary
|
|
response 161 of 166:
|
Aug 30 12:14 UTC 2003 |
I realize that comparison somehow makes the situation in
Iraq more tolerable, reasonable even, for you. But I find
no comfort in thinking that reckless and drunk drivers
happen here so what's the problem if we kill a few thousand
innocent Iraqis while we occupy their country.
Try as I can - it doesn't work. Maybe that kind of
rationalization needs practice.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 162 of 166:
|
Aug 30 20:10 UTC 2003 |
In almost all cases of accidental deaths here there is some form of
compensation for the victims and their relatives and punishment for
the perpetrators of the deaths. If any analogy is going to be claimed,
as pvn wants to do, then compensation and punishment should follow
in Iraq also. However the deaths in Iraq are gratuitous, and the
perpetrators are supposed to be honored. I don't see any equivalence.
|
tod
|
|
response 163 of 166:
|
Aug 30 20:17 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 164 of 166:
|
Aug 30 20:22 UTC 2003 |
I recognize that just compensation and punishing does not follow in
*all cases*, just in almost all cases.
We are also talking about the gratuitious slaying of civilians in
bombings, barrages, and stupid mistakes, which were most of the cases.
I think the military euphamism is "collateral damage". How about some
collateral compensation and punishment?
|
pvn
|
|
response 165 of 166:
|
Aug 31 06:10 UTC 2003 |
re#164: First of all they were not "gratuitous" but as you point out
"collateral damage". THe military took great pain to strike targets in
such a way as to mitigate civilian casualties and even spent a lot of
money for the technology to do so. Part of the huge cost of the war is
that smart bombs are so very much more expensive. I recall reading a
story about some poor iraqi civilian bitching to the media about how his
windows had been blown out of his house right across the street from a
target building. In past wars the target would have been destroyed but
he wouldn't have been alive to complain.
|
tod
|
|
response 166 of 166:
|
Aug 31 14:32 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|