4000 dead in Bush's war on Iraq

[Sauron]

Front page of the NYT.
Front page of MSNBC.
Front page of the WaPo.
Front page of CBS.
Front page of USA Today.
Front page of Reuters.

But you couldn't tell it from Faux News - not a peep on the front page; not even a mention on their dedicated Politics section.

[Clutch Munny]

How many of these sources will treat the Iraqi civilian dead as holding even a roughly similar importance (say, 1/4 the importance)?

Every dead US soldier is someone's ghastly heartbreaking loss. But so too are the dead Iraqis. All n x 100,000 of them. So I'm a little bit torn about anti-war protesters hammering the 4000 mark very hard.

[Crumb]

Do they all call it "Bush's" war on Iraq? Is no one else to be held responsible for this mess?

[Nullifidian]

Perhaps we ought to commemorate this moment with an artistic recreation of the Bush cabinet planning the Iraq War:

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/9/1/6/eclipseofthesun.jpg

(The original is here (http://www.artinthepicture.com/paintings/George_Grosz/Eclipse-of-the-Sun/).)

[Watser?]

C'qu'elle en a bu, du beau sang, cette terre,
Sang d'ouvrier et sang de paysan,
Car les bandits, qui sont cause des guerres,
N'en meurent jamais, on n'tue qu'les innocents.

...

C'qu'elle en a bu, des larmes, cette terre,
Larmes d'ouvrier et larmes de paysan,
Car les bandits, qui sont cause des guerres,
Ne pleurent jamais, car ce sont des tyrans.

http://www.paroles.net/chanson/11873.1

[ChuckF]

How many of these sources will treat the Iraqi civilian dead as holding even a roughly similar importance (say, 1/4 the importance)?

Every dead US soldier is someone's ghastly heartbreaking loss. But so too are the dead Iraqis. All n x 100,000 of them. So I'm a little bit torn about anti-war protesters hammering the 4000 mark very hard.
This is a very valid point, but I think there is a legitimate reason for hammering the 4,000 number. It is a milestone - a horrifying, outrageous milestone - that achieves its resonance in the three zeroes at the end. Now, of course, the Iraqi death toll is in the hundreds of thousands. But we don't know exactly how many, because apparently no one ever really cared to count. We may never know. Set aside the problem that Iraqis deaths are "over there" and American military deaths are "here," and thereby provide a more tangible demonstration of the costs of the war. Set aside the problem that there are fairly few mentions of debilitating, disfiguring injury statistics on either side. 4,000 is round and large. It is smaller by magnitudes that the big albeit indeterminate n x 100,000, but it is concrete and immediate. If it can bring some renewed attention to the ongoing catastrophe, then I think that's good. I don't expect much of the media to drop the presidential "horserace" narrative to focus on Iraqi civilian deaths - that is so 2005 - but maybe for a moment people can quantify exactly how much Bush supports the troops: 4,000.

[Clutch Munny]

Well said, and points well taken. Like I said: a little bit torn.

[California Tanker]

But you couldn't tell it from Faux News - not a peep on the front page; not even a mention on their dedicated Politics section.

For the record, I just looked at it, and it's on the front page sortof buried in the 'latest news' section.
It's the top headline on their politics page, the title is "Bush 'Bears the Responsibility' of Iraq Troop Deaths"

And also for the record, I don't think #4000 is any more or less important than #3999 or #4001.

NTM

[Sauron]

But you couldn't tell it from Faux News - not a peep on the front page; not even a mention on their dedicated Politics section.

For the record, I just looked at it, and it's on the front page sortof buried in the 'latest news' section.
It's the top headline on their politics page, the title is "Bush 'Bears the Responsibility' of Iraq Troop Deaths"

Nope, not the same thing. Faux News could have run that particular headline after any of the major fucked up events that killed batches of Americans in Iraq.

My point was that the number 4,000 represents a grim milestone that shouldn't be buried three levels deep in the webpage hierarchy - yet that is precisely what the GOP echo-chamber at Faux News did.

And also for the record, I don't think #4000 is any more or less important than #3999 or #4001.

NTM
Nobody does. But milestones have a way of crystallizing people's thinking and focusing the discussion. It's like the "Five Years" thread - is 4 years and 364 days any less important than a full five years? In concrete terms - no. But in terms of reminding us what we're doing and what the cost has been - most certainly it is.

[Freddy]

The 4,000 number was broken down with 52% from roadside IEDs, 16% from bullets, and 20% from non-combat related deaths.

[Dingfod]

And the remaining 12%? Suicide?

[chunksmediocrites]

According to a recent Pew poll only 28% of Americans (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/13/national/main3933818.shtml) could identify roughly the number of US deaths in Iraq.

I was amazed at some of the not-so-long-ago discussions by right-wing think-tanks who were trying to offer plans to Bush regarding an attack on Iran; they emphasized how they could keep the war from having any impact on consumers in the US by using US oil reserves, etc., and I thought- yeah! We don't want anyone in the US to go without cell phone service or internet service or the latest issue of People or to see the price of fuel really spike up or to have any interruption in their daily lives. Because then they might take notice and get pissed, you know, if they were suddenly denied their chosen brand of deodorant or cigarette, or they couldn't buy lotto tickets. Imaginary-Sky-Wizard forbid there was actual rationing of food and materials like during WWII. The foreign war adventure would get shut down with the quickness. Righties looking out for the common man again!

[Stormlight]

I wonder how all those upright people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biedermann_und_die_Brandstifter) who supported and still support this mess feel about having all those lives on their conscience?

[Wonderer]

It's all very sad.

[D. Scarlatti]

The George Grosz parody is brilliant, one of my favorite painters.

[Uthgar the Brazen]

I wonder how all those upright people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biedermann_und_die_Brandstifter) who supported and still support this mess feel about having all those lives on their conscience?

No conscience. Problem solved. :sadcheer:

[Caligulette]

It's interesting. There was a huge hue and cry when the US casualty count neared the number of those lost in the World Trade Center buildings. Now that it's about doubled, not so much.

Bush is still yammering on about how "they (the soldiers) will not be lost in vain"- what, exactly, does he mean by this?

It is also interesting that it is not such a big issue in the Democratic Party race. Were it, the complicity of that Party in consistently ok-ing the funds to continue this debacle would have to be brought out. It is interesting that not even Kucinich, the "official" former anti-war candidate has not been heard from during all this- he didn't even issue his traditional rebuttal to the State of the Union Address. He is being kept very quiet because the DP can't afford to have their pro-war bent exposed at this time.

Coverage of the war itself has gone way down over the last six months. The war continues, but it is slipping from the minds of people at large.

Miami Herald (http://www.miamiherald.com/776/story/458872.html)
Statistics clearly illustrate the diminished attention. For the first 10 weeks of the year, the war accounted for 3 percent of television, newspaper and Internet stories in the Project for Excellence in Journalism's survey of news coverage. During the same period in 2007, Iraq filled 23 percent of the news hole.

The difference is even more stark on cable news networks: 24 percent of the time spent on Iraq last year, just 1 percent this year.

"The fact that it went down didn't surprise me," said Tom Rosenstiel, the project's director. "But the fact that it almost disappeared is something I didn't expect."

[Farren]

PZ has some fitting commentary on the issue:

Pharyngula: 300 million dead (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/300_million_dead.php)


So now we have reached the nice round milestone of 4,000 dead in Iraq. 4000 dead American soldiers, that is; it's almost as if the two orders of magnitude greater number of slaughtered Iraqis, the millions of refugees, the destruction of an entire country, simply don't matter and don't count. Americans find it hard to gather outrage over thousands of our own dead, and tens of thousands wounded, and they sure as hell aren't going to get stirred up over hundreds of thousands of dead foreigners.

[Caligulette]

And what of the history of Iraq? The looted libraries, museums, archeological sites? It is, indeed, as if the place were being erased.

[Uthgar the Brazen]

And what of the history of Iraq? The looted libraries, museums, archeological sites? It is, indeed, as if the place were being erased.

Gotta make room for Starbucks.

[Farren]

One of the first things the liberating army of the USA did was build a military base next to Iraq's most ancient ruins, then drive all over them. Its a crying shame.

[Caligulette]

If Starbucks *did* open there, at least they would provide jobs for the local community.

[ChuckF]

Are you mad, woman?! Give the terrorists espresso?!

[Caligulette]

If the terrorists had jobs, maybe they wouldn't be so terrible.

[Watser?]

I thought terrorist WAS a job?

[Caligulette]

Well, it is now.

[Watser?]

Not much future in it...

[Caligulette]

No, but at least the UAW isn't representing them, so they have half a chance... Sorry....What I meant was:

Maybe not, but at least it's hiring.

[godfry n. glad]

Yeah, but they'll be outsourcing just like everybody else, soon.

[Ymir's blood]

Terrorism, not just a job... an adventure.

[Caligulette]

I think Army will sue if they use that slogan.

[Ymir's blood]

Can tribunals issue monetary awards for damages?