A sobering, if mostly silent, milestone
The New York Times reported a grim fact in its Week in Review section last week: 65 women have now been killed in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan. That's sixty-five females, sixty-five individuals who were supposed to be kept out of the hot zone, for fear that men would move to protect them rather than execute the mission and/or that the American public would be traumatized. But I have never heard anyone in the media to date note these deaths, even though their number is rising ever higher. I wondered why, since there has been so much emotional energy put into keeping women OUT of combat. That led me to wonder in turn why the American public has been so sanguine, so apparently unconcerned, about the men who have died, and about the war generally.
This country has inflicted incredible pain and suffering on a people who did nothing to us, and sustained terrible losses itself. Is this due to sheer bloodlust? A misguided belief that somehow, in punishing the Iraqis, we make ourselves safer and get revenge for 9/11? Apathy born of non-participation? Or maybe the lack of a military draft, to ensure that everyone bears the burden of these conflicts? I'm inclined to believe the latter, since I remember the Vietnam war. I am fairly certain that the protesters of that era were less concerned for the ultimate fate of Vietnam or Vietnamese than for the safety of their husbands, sons and brothers--oh yes, and sisters, mothers and daughters. Several dozen women died in that conflict, too, over a much longer period of time.
Help me understand this. The Hungarians discover their government has lied to them about the state of the Hungarian economy, and they pour into the streets in indignation, demanding the heads of the offending ministers. This country invades another, inflicts terrible punishment on a benighted people and gets thousands of our own citizens killed or seriously wounded--and nary a peep from anyone. I hope someone can enlighten me, because I have only these semi-coherent thoughts on the matter.
This country has inflicted incredible pain and suffering on a people who did nothing to us, and sustained terrible losses itself. Is this due to sheer bloodlust? A misguided belief that somehow, in punishing the Iraqis, we make ourselves safer and get revenge for 9/11? Apathy born of non-participation? Or maybe the lack of a military draft, to ensure that everyone bears the burden of these conflicts? I'm inclined to believe the latter, since I remember the Vietnam war. I am fairly certain that the protesters of that era were less concerned for the ultimate fate of Vietnam or Vietnamese than for the safety of their husbands, sons and brothers--oh yes, and sisters, mothers and daughters. Several dozen women died in that conflict, too, over a much longer period of time.
Help me understand this. The Hungarians discover their government has lied to them about the state of the Hungarian economy, and they pour into the streets in indignation, demanding the heads of the offending ministers. This country invades another, inflicts terrible punishment on a benighted people and gets thousands of our own citizens killed or seriously wounded--and nary a peep from anyone. I hope someone can enlighten me, because I have only these semi-coherent thoughts on the matter.
1 Comments:
medicated and self medicated. you don't feel if you are stoned and addicted to consumerism.
Post a Comment
<< Home