2000 and counting...

[bignick]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/ap/20040908/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

over a thousand now dead...and i don't seen any signs of slowing down in this "never ending war on terror"

 

[AaronLucia]

How many people die in car accidents a year?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

How many people die in car accidents a year?

That, sir, is totally irrelevant. It is a fallacious argument to intimate that the casaulties are trivial in comparison to deaths attributable to car accidents. One might as well ask "how many people starved in Sudan this year?" Or "how many people died of heart disease this year?"

You could come up with ANY number greater than the 1,000 casualty figure. The one oft quoted is the first day of the invasion of Normandy, where we lost over 6,000 dead. It is a false analogy. Iraq was not the world power Germany was, nor was there any question as to our mission on June 6, 1944. There are questions about this war today that didn't exist sixty years ago, and a current loss of confidence in our President not seen since the 1970's.

Your rhetorical question only serves to do the following:

1. It distracts from the issue with a rhetorical "sleight of hand" or legerdemain. By doing so you ignore the relevant political issues at hand.

2. It flippantly minimizes the deaths of those men and women who have died in Iraq. Every one of those thousand people had a family. I don't think any one of those ruined families would appreciate you coming up and callously telling them that the significance of their child's death is lessened somehow by comparing it the deaths on the highways here in America.


Regards,


Steve

 

[kenpo tiger]

Aaron, Now you've gone and gotten HHJH upset. Not good, believe me.

As to your remark about car accidents, and HHJH's response, there are many many incidents which can and should be remembered, the most cogent of which in relation to the war in Iraq has an anniversary this Saturday.

Whether you agree with Mr. Bush or not, to trivialize the deaths of those willingly serving their country is abhorrent.

Never forgive, never forget.

 

[bignick]

How many people die in car accidents a year?

You know what, they're all a tragedy too...not only are you dismissing the deaths of the soldiers in Iraq, you're dismissing the deaths of the people in the car crashes...I've had no less than 5 friends/family members die in car accidents within the last two years...

 

[kenpo tiger]

You know what, they're all a tragedy too...not only are you dismissing the deaths of the soldiers in Iraq, you're dismissing the deaths of the people in the car crashes...I've had no less than 5 friends/family members die in car accidents within the last two years...

I think we tend to be a bit jaded when it comes to considering the gravity of each due to the media blaring so much bad news. And, we all have our priorities and 'druthers'.

Our community is a small school district and there are annually two to three deaths of teens/young adults in cars. No one in Iraq - yet.

When I was in high school, a lot of my classmates volunteered to go to Vietnam. A good friend joined the Navy and served a couple tours of duty there. He was lucky enough to come back - and in one piece. There are a few of my classmates who didn't, and some who did who are not whole, not to mention the psychological effects. That was a war which was considered 'dirty' and it wasn't considered morally responsible to support our troops because war was wrong. The thinking has changed somewhat in recent years, but it doesn't diminish the sacrifice made voluntarily (in most cases). I think that's the point here.

 

[JPR]

People die in wars. That is why you don’t really want to fight them because no matter how well you do, you still have dead young men and women. Not only that, but you usually tear up the battle field so drastically that in order for the people there to survive you will have to rebuild their world for them (think Marshall Plan). When I consider the soldier I don’t think it matters if a war is “right” or “moral” or “just”. You can hate the war, but don’t hate the solider. The solider on the ground doing the fighting, bleeding and dying doesn’t choose to go to war, he / she chooses to follow their oath to obey the Commander-n-Chief and go where they are told. That is why I admire them and appreciated them and why their loss is different.



To compare the death of a soldier to a car wreck does the soldier an injustice. A car wreck is an accident. When you leave your driveway you don’t expect to be in a wreck. The soldier’s death isn’t nearly the same. When you go out to war, you know / expect people to shoot at you. And when they shoot at you, some of you tend to die. It isn’t an accident. The enemy is trying to kill you and you are trying to kill them. You are trading your life for a purpose.



Oh, and another point, some people have said that all the deaths in Vietnam were a waste. Not to me. The war may well have been a bad choice, but each of those soldiers that died there did so with honor, because they were living up to the oath to serve this country. It will be the same in this war in Iraq. Perhaps this is the wrong thing to do, and perhaps we are in the wrong place at the wrong time, but the troops that are there are showing us what is best in the human race, the ability to make the ultimate sacrifice for others even if you don’t agree or understand with what you are sacrificing for.

JPR

 

[Feisty Mouse]

JPR - I agree with you about respecting the soldiers who go to war, even if you disagree with the war itself.

I think sometimes people say "it's such a waste" not because they think it was stupid of the soldiers to fight, but because the loss of human life should have been prevented, and loyal people are/were being sent to their deaths for a reason some consider poor. That disgraces our troops even more.

 

[Tkang_TKD]

Speaking as a sailor, I can tell you that a good number of us go to serve in this sqirmish in Iraq, and a good many of us do not agree with the reasons we are there (maybe we aren't in a majority, but we are here just the same). Just the same, we did take an oath to protect our country and to obey the orders of our CinC. Whether we agree with those orders or not, we will follow them. We knew what we were getting into when we volunteered to serve our Country. Anyone thinking that they would serve without ever facing the possibility of fighting and dying is only fooling themselves.

 

[bignick]

i think it's understandable why sometimes people rail against the soldiers that return from an unpopular conflict/war...they are an easy representative of that situation...sure...they didn't make the call, they just do try to do their best for their country...but you don't see the politicians in the battlefield, so their responsibility and connection to the events aren't as readily seen as the person wearing the camo

 

[AaronLucia]

While i never intented to enflame emotions, it seems i did.

I never and will never diminish the sacrifice that the soldiers have given.

But, i always think its interesting how the media explodes everything!

It's also interesting how 1,000 is such a big number now. If memory serves me correctly many thousands died in earlier wars, and we are crying about 1,000.
This is war for heaven sakes!

And yes, i realize every single soldier has a family, but so do car-accident victims. Why isn't the tally of car-accident victims up on the front page? Because, we know its an everyday occurrence and its just an 'accident'.

We go crazy about 1,000 deaths in a WAR. Every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine knows this, they go with the knowledge they could die, its not accidental.

Anyways, bleh.

 

[Tkang_TKD]

Aaron, the reason that people get upset about 1000 deaths in this war is that many don't agree with the reasons for the war, and many believe that we were lied to in starting this war. Additionally, the majority of these combat deaths occurred after the declaration of "Mission Accomplished", and many have occured (my opinion only) due to the cavalier attitude of "Bring it on".

I speak only for myself, but you didn't enflame any emotions in me. I mearly spoke my point of view regarding the committment that we make.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I agree...we should never malign the troops for their service. We should support the troops, even if we don't support the President or the war.

Having said that, one of the knee jerk responses I've seen to anti-war sentiment involves a loudly voiced "Support our troops". Its a guilt trip of sorts, suggesting that one isn't patriotic or supportive of the troops in taking an anti-war stance. The assumption is that one can't be anti-war and pro-soldier at the same time.

I read an article three days ago of a Viet Vet and former Army Ranger who just buried his son after the lad had been killed in Iraq. The grieving father was against the war. Do we suggest he is unpatriotic? Do we admonish him to "support our troops?"


Here's a poem concerning the treatment of soldiers by one of my favorite authors:

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Tommy, by Rudyard Kipling.


Regards,


Steve

 

[bignick]

thanks for sharing the poem...yes it's unfortunate that the "support the troops"...is used to often to try to silence people that disagree with the current agenda and reasons for this war

 

[PeachMonkey]

Having said that, one of the knee jerk responses I've seen to anti-war sentiment involves a loudly voiced "Support our troops". Its a guilt trip of sorts, suggesting that one isn't patriotic or supportive of the troops in taking an anti-war stance. The assumption is that one can't be anti-war and pro-soldier at the same time.

A lot of this comes from the urban myth about Vietnam soldiers having been "spit upon" by war protesters upon their return to the States. See:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1548/is_n2_v12/ai_19549100
http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=215

In the end, these myths propagate because of a mixture of psychological factors and deliberate manipulation by the government. It's always far, far easier to paint your opponents as traitors and monsters than it is to debate them.

 

[bignick]

A lot of this comes from the urban myth about Vietnam soldiers having been "spit upon" by war protesters upon their return to the States.

ahem...somebody wanna reply to this....

a lot soldiers from vietnam were not treated well when returning...

 

[PeachMonkey]

a lot soldiers from vietnam were not treated well when returning...

Did you actually read either of those articles? Can you show documented evidence? I'm perfectly willing to believe that there were instances of this sort of treatment, but the idea that it was widespread has been clearly shown to be myth.

 

[bignick]

i did read them...and honestly...it shows no actual documented incidents where someone said they had been spit on and there was direct evidence that shows they weren't...they mainly relied on other counts of distortion of actual combat experience and the like...nor did i say that spitting was widespread, but they were not well treated...which you one article does state....also, the fact that a lot of former veterans were later opposed to the war doesn't discredit other's account of mistreatment

 

[kenpo tiger]

A lot of this comes from the urban myth about Vietnam soldiers having been "spit upon" by war protesters upon their return to the States. See:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1548/is_n2_v12/ai_19549100
http://www.vvaw.org/veteran/article/?id=215

In the end, these myths propagate because of a mixture of psychological factors and deliberate manipulation by the government. It's always far, far easier to paint your opponents as traitors and monsters than it is to debate them.

Peach,

All I can say to you is, those of us who lived through the Vietnam conflict know what was and what wasn't. I personally never saw anyone spit upon a solider, but to bombard that same soldier with invective is equally as bad.

Ask your master instructor what it was like to be a Marine coming home from that war. KT

 

[AaronLucia]

So why are today's soldiers being treated better then they were in Vietnam?