Using the Iraq body count as a political tool

[Siena]

I was reading the New York commuter newspaper called the Metro yesterday and came across a letter which made this statement:

"A sick and sad question is: when the number of our brave soldiers killed in Iraq exceeds the number of innocents killed on September 11, who will be more excited to use this information strictly to go after George Bush politically? The mainstream media or the ever increasing far left of the Democratic Party? Watch and find out."

[BlueEyedSon]

1. I'll happily use it. Why not? Is he not responsible for the deaths?

[Siena]

4. You do make a good point...

After reading that, I just thought about how easily we all throw around bodycount numbers and make statements like, as much as I'm upset people are dying...I'm really glad W is fucking up in Iraq! I guess it's just important to always keep in mind that we're talking about lives. Just not to be so casual about it.

[BlueEyedSon]

The "war" is politically motived, does not make us safer,

was barely planned, executed incompetently, etc, etc.

Now we have a stream of body bags and broken lives coming home, our treasury is hemorrhaging money.... HE - and his advisers - ARE TO BLAME.

[Siena]

15. I'm not arguing that. Actually, I'm not arguing anything.

He and his advisors are definitely to blame. I was just posting because it gave me pause for a second to just think about how casually I myself might mention the bodycount number too.

[BlueEyedSon]

17. Sorry, just venting!

[Siena]

19. Vent away!

:)

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Siena]

27. Well thanks Beetwasher!

No I have never made a statement like that but I have heard statements made. And I'm new to DU but I did however hear a statement made yesterday, I think, along the lines of, not happy this person died...but glad people might notice the war. That's all. Side note: why do some people always think you're talking directly, specifically to them when you post on a general message board? It's strange to me. I'm confident in my own opinions and if someone posted something ridiculous that has nothing to do with me, I wouldn't immediately think it does.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Siena]

35. Sorry about the We...

I'm at work and writing quickly. I apologize for fucking up my pronouns. As for me hearing people say that, I have definitely. I don't know how to back it up as I'm not in the habit of carrying a tape recorder with me when I talk to my friends. As for the post about it, I don't have time to look back through archives to find a thread of names I don't know because I don't follow sports. What I remember is that it was an article from ESPN and it was a coach or owner of a team whose nephew died in Iraq. And the person who posted said not that I'm happy that this person died...but maybe it will bring attention to the war. I don't follow sports at all so I don't even know how to find the friggin post with not knowing names. But I assure you, I'm not a liar. Save insults like that for our selfish administration.

[Beetwasher]

38. Heh?

That's not how you portrayed it and what you just wrote is totally different than what you originally wrote:

"..as much as I'm upset people are dying...I'm really glad W is fucking up in Iraq!"

The above is MUCH different than: "...not that I'm happy that this person died...but maybe it will bring attention to the war..."

So, you are totally changing what you said and that's at the very least intellectually dishonest if not outright lying.

"But I assure you, I'm not a liar."

Ok, I'll just take your word for it. :eyes:

"I'm at work and writing quickly. I apologize for fucking up my pronouns."

I suggest you pay a bit more attention to what you write, and take responsibility for it and be prepared to back it up. We're not a bunch of idiots here on DU, what you say WILL be scrutinized. If you cant' take the heat yadda yadda.

[Siena]

40. OK beetwasher

I'll do that. Thanks for the advice. I wonder if you have the guts to talk to someone that rudely to their face or only when you hide behind the "beetwasher" tag. But I will heed your advice and not try to bang out responses when I'm in the middle of an important assignment. Thanks.

[Beetwasher]

44. Actually, Yes I Do

I call people on their bullshit whenever and wherever I see it, face to face or online. You just got called. As I said, can't stand the heat....:shrug:

[Siena]

45. Oh beefeater...

don't worry, I don't feel any heat. You know - one thing I always liked about liberals is that they are able to have a rational debate and learn and actually change their mind! Conservatives are the ones who always think they're right and won't change. Actually, after listening to the professor who said "using the truth is never unseemly", I did learn something and do feel differently about my original posts. I like my experience here and feel that I learn things and like engaging in friendly debate.

[Beetwasher]

46. Good!

I hope so. That's the hallmark of a well developed individual, to live and learn. Of course, infantile things like calling someone names (Beefeater? How droll) are beneath someone as enlightened as you, right?

Me, I'm just an asshole, everyone knows that.

[Siena]

47. You're funny.

I hope there are no ill feelings. :toast:

personal question - where do you live if you don't mind me asking?

[Beetwasher]

48. You First

"But I will heed your advice and not try to bang out responses when I'm in the middle of an important assignment."

Are you still in the middle of an important assignment? If so, what? And what kind of assignment and where do YOU live?

[Siena]

49. Can I PM you?

[Beetwasher]

50. Go For It

n/t

[Siena]

51. I just did.

[zbdent]

2. "Ever increasing far left"???

I thought that we were dying out . . .

And I do not consider myself FAR LEFT!

In all honesty, I feel I am moderately left.

[Siena]

6. Well clearly,

the letter was written by a Bush loving arrogant know nothing asshole. That wasn't really my point of posting that.

[zbdent]

21. Not an attack on you

but on what might be a tongue-in-cheek letter-writer . . .

[Siena]

22. Interesting point.

[deadparrot]

20. Scare tactics...

Hell, in their world, Hillary Clinton is "far left." :eyes:

[Swede]

24. It's the right that is redshifting.

More and more every day.

[Kraklen]

3. Hmm, the republicans used the 3,000 dead 911 victims..

to excitedly kill 1,800 U.S. troops.

Just imagine what they'll do with 3,000 dead U.S. troops.

[enki23]

5. you should know better than to hold a republican accountable for anything

holding republicans accountable is only something the "far left" would ever do.

[ktowntennesseedem]

7. It's a damn shame that the numbers might need to go that high

before the MSM or the brain-dead public sets up and takes notice. What if 10,000, 20,000, more, had died on 9/11. Does that mean the Iraq mess is justified up to that number?

For a just cause, millions would be willing to lay down their life. But for a lie, even one death is too many.

[Siena]

11. Very true...

And my other favorite point is the obvious correlation that the writer is making between Iraq and 9/11! Will they ever learn???

[bluestateguy]

8. Yep. That's what I intend to do

These people wanted this war, and now they are getting it.

Yeah, they are getting it, so I have no compunction about saying "I told you so".

[Lars39]

9. I update the number of deaths daily on the back windshield

of my vehicle. People are beginning to notice that the numbers change.

[Siena]

12. That's a good idea!

[Lars39]

29. I've only received positive feedback from it.

I don't have any bumper stickers on the vehicle, so there's nothing else
detracting from the statement. I didn't include the Afghanistan troop
numbers, but when people ask me, I tell them it didn't include them, and
give them that number. It really makes an impact. And I'm in a town
where it is very rare to find political bumper stickers at all.

RIP
1828
Troops

[Siena]

30. Good for you!

That's a great statement and I'm sure it's making some difference.

:yourock:

[ProfessorGAC]

10. A Leader Of A Powerful Country, Starts A War. . .

. . .with provocations that turned out to be false and the number of dead troops don't matter.

It would be unseemly to use these for political points, if the number wasn't true. Using the truth is NEVER unseemly.
The Professor

[Siena]

16. Well said.

[bryant69]

13. Nice

You think we are happy to see soldiers die, Siena? Do you believe that the left wants to see soldiers die so we can make Bush look bad? I wish we had never embarked on this elective unnecessary war (although I tenatively supported it at the time). But I would certainly be a lot happier if we were succeeding in Iraq - it would be better all around.

But we aren't.

F*cking Conservatoids are going to throw this one at us (thy've been throwing it at us since the beginning) "THe very people who urged against this war and didn't want to invade Iraq are the same people who now seem happy that soldiers are dying." uh no. If we wanted soldiers to die, we would have pushed for the war, wouldn't we?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Siena]

18. No I'm not saying that at all.

I simply posted what an obvious conservative wrote. I in no way, shape or form feel that anyone actually desires people to die.

[bryant69]

39. Do you think liberals want that, is the question

I could be misreading you - but that's a pretty inflammatory statement you chose to post, and your subsequent comments make me think that, while you aren't willing to go as far as conservatives, you do think we should be more careful not to trumpet the figures.

Or, in other words, we should apologize for pointing how President Bush has screwed up the Iraq war.

[Siena]

42. First off, I didn't make the statement.

I read the statement. And no - I don't think you shouldn't state the figure or apologize for saying bush fucked up. All I was saying was that it should be thought about what that 1800 number means. Just give pause for a second rather then use it as 1 of a million reasons to slam W.

[ProfessorGAC]

23. She Was Quoting Someone Else, Bryant!

I think you're attributing a bad attitude to the wrong person. The idiot who wrote that column is who you should direct your picque.
The Professor

[Siena]

28. Thank you professor.

[Norquist Nemesis]

14. Oh great news!!! "The ever increasing far left"

We're gaining in numbers!

[ProfessorGAC]

26. I Thought That Too

Now, we're "ever increasing" which is also the same as an increasing threat. They're worried because the empty suits have been shown, indeed, to be full of air.
The Professor

[BiggJawn]

31. Actually, 58,000 is my personal "go apeshit" number

Rotten bastard and that sociopath Rumsferatu want to "do better than Nixon"...

I'm not a Happy Camper even NOW. hell by the time this gets through the sever and posts, my count could be outdated already...

[Bouncy Ball]

:cry:

[Bouncy Ball]

33. Hmmm. Well seeing as I see the bush administration as being

responsible for not heeding the warnings and not protecting those 3000 on September 11th, they seem pretty much the same to me. I mean bush didn't fly the planes into the buildings, but he got numerous, very specific warnings. "Osama bin Laden determined to attack within the US." There was even a description of using planes, etc. I mean what did he need, a fucking neon billboard with warnings on it? Even then, I doubt he would have gotten up off his ass and done anything.

I hope like crazy we don't reach 3000 dead soldiers in Iraq. But the tragic reality is that we are well on our way. And I still don't know what the hell our troops are dying FOR. I still don't know what the hell we are killing Iraqis FOR.

It's ALL senseless death. So in that sense, yeah, very similar. But it wouldn't occur to me, when our troop deaths reach 3000, to draw a parallel beyond the fact that NONE of those people in either group had to die. None of the approximately 100,000 Iraqis who have been killed in the last two years had to die, either.

But they always get ignored by reich-wingers. I guess they don't count.

[PATRICK]

34. So casualties determine justice

and one man is murder, several serial killing and many a war crime. It raises an important point. How hard would it be to call a crime to justice if it can claim success with little apparent suffering? The weighted scales of RW justice can't accommodate so many dead. The real shame is that they hold the scales and try to rig them to their advantage in commission of crimes.

Is it better that evil is not successful in the short term as the long term will have even worse consequences. Numbers just wake people up. Another crude shame. Of course one cute blond in distress might get more attention than hundreds of war heroes.

RW spin twisting in the wind.

[evil eggplant]

36. YOu have it wrong

Don't you listen to President Bush? He said that the best way to honor our Fallen is to keep fighting until we win.

I think I'm gonna be sick

[Siena]

37. Did he really say that?

He's disgusting. :puke:

[manic expression]

41. What a fascist jerk

Oh, what about the THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT IRAQIS THAT WE MURDERED?!?!?! DO THEY COUNT?!?!?!

When the number of the soldiers in this oppressive force exceeds the number of innocents killed on 9/11, I will oppose the war JUST as much as I always have. It will only further prove the fact that the occupation is horrible. I will also use this to point out the futility, idiocy and folly of this disgusting action.

[Dr Fate]

43. Facts= Liberal Bias. n/t

n/t