http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4525412.stm
Since the original invastion of Iraq the estimates of civilian casualties range from the conservative estimate of 25.000 (this is counting only the deaths reported in the media), but the organisation (Bodycount...sounds like a rap band, if you ask me) itself admits that most deaths will not have been reported in the media.
Without wanting to get into graphic descriptions of what it is like looking at a badly burned mother holding her decapitated baby, do you think the war was worth it?
Don't forget the injury count is generally 15x higher than the death count. That's a hell of a lot of injured children, my friends.
And let's look at this in a larger context: Every war has civilian casualties. The Vietnam war, for example, had roughly 3.000.000 civilian casualties.
The bombing of Dresden during WWII, as another example, led to around 30.000 civilian deaths, just slightly more than the civilian deaths during the Battle of Britain.
Do you think this is EVER justified?
The obvious first argument would be: If we're attacked, we must defend ourselves.
However, do you think it is ever justified to act in a manner which will cause so many deaths and injuries to people who are not directly involved in anything?
Say, during the Cold War, do you think that if the Soviet Union had dropped a nuclear bomb on New York, that it would be justified to drop one back on Moscow? Knowing that the perpetrators are probably in bunkers and only civilians are going to die? So, basically, killing only those who have nothing to do with anything?
Do you think we should be Paladines of morality? Never acting in such a manner to cause civilian casualties?
If not, do think we're just as bad as any other person?
Originally posted by shavixmirdo you miss SVW ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4525412.stm
Since the original invastion of Iraq the estimates of civilian casualties range from the conservative estimate of 25.000 (this is counting only the deaths reported in the media), but the organisation (Bodycount...sounds like a rap band, if you ask me) itself admits that most deaths will not have been re ...[text shortened]... anner to cause civilian casualties?
If not, do think we're just as bad as any other person?
Originally posted by shavixmirmy response is that your post seems very much addressed to us citizens in the "we" voice.
Just respond to the post.
If I wanted to hear rubbish I'd have posted it in Spirituality.
Thank you.
i am not a us citizen.
i do believe it is likely that your stats are correct ... but ... they only look at the us attrocites.
many countries have done many yucky things.
i do not feel like attacking the us at the moment.
SVW was maniacly u.s.
he would have given you more joy.
b.t.w. you forgot korea - the us did many bad things there.
Originally posted by flexmoreI mention Iraq as the example (recent news).
my response is that your post seems very much addressed to us citizens in the "we" voice.
i am not a us citizen.
i do believe it is likely that your stats are correct ... but ... they only look at the us attrocites.
many countries have done many yucky things.
i do not feel like attacking the us at the moment.
SVW was maniacly u.s.
he would have given you more joy.
b.t.w. you forgot korea - the us did many bad things there.
I mentioned Vietnam because of the high number of casualties.
And I make mention of the battle of Britain (German attack) and Dresden (US and British attack) for comparison purposes.
The post is not about the US at all. It's about killing civilians and whether it's morally justifiable or not.
Originally posted by shavixmirbut every situation you look at is a bad u.s. deed.
I mention Iraq as the example (recent news).
I mentioned Vietnam because of the high number of casualties.
And I make mention of the battle of Britain (German attack) and Dresden (US and British attack) for comparison purposes.
The post is not about the US at all. It's about killing civilians and whether it's morally justifiable or not.
i know the us is very powerful and has accordingly regularly been guilty of being the bull in the china shop.
but
i am not interested in this topic so much at the moment ... i have tired of it ... i think many people have tired of it (we know the truth, we hope for change, we know we cannot force it)
but SVW never tired of it ... he even never tired of the ussr v usa war ...
what will happen with you as you grow old?
Originally posted by flexmoreThe Battle of Britain wasn't a bad US deed.
but every situation you look at is a bad u.s. deed.
i know the us is very powerful and has accordingly regularly been guilty of being the bull in the china shop.
but
i am not interested in this topic so much at the moment ... i have tired of it ... i think many people have tired of it (we know the truth, we hope for change, we know we cannot force ...[text shortened]... ... he even never tired of the ussr v usa war ...
what will happen with you as you grow old?
Again, it's not about the US or whoever, it's about civlian casualties as a morally acceptable loss.
And when I grow old I'll probably die.
Originally posted by shavixmirIf not, do [you?] think we're just as bad as any other person?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4525412.stm
Since the original invastion of Iraq the estimates of civilian casualties range from the conservative estimate of 25.000 (this is counting only the deaths reported in the media), but the organisation (Bodycount...sounds like a rap band, if you ask me) itself admits that most deaths will not have been re ...[text shortened]... anner to cause civilian casualties?
If not, do think we're just as bad as any other person?
Makes me think of another one of your threads. The one about taking the death penalty? You said you'd go down fighting, bitterly I pressumed.
That's human nature. I don't think anyone who hasn't devoted him/herself to it, stands above that kind of behaviour (like a buddhist monk or something). A country is not much different from its inhabitants. You kill my family I'll make it my top priority to hurt you or anyone in your vincinity (including innocent civilians if that will hurt you). You said it yourself, in that other thread. Get a contract job on everyone connected to the people you feel are doing you wrong. Right?
What makes you think that despite the horror of wars, a society will stand above such things, when we citizens can't seem to act appropriately in our own small-scale personal wars?
Originally posted by stockenI don't know if it is morally justifiable or not.
If not, do [you?] think we're just as bad as any other person?
Makes me think of another one of your threads. The one about taking the death penalty? You said you'd go down fighting, bitterly I pressumed.
That's human nature. I don't think anyone who hasn't devoted him/herself to it, stands above that kind of behaviour (like a buddhist monk ...[text shortened]... things, when we citizens can't seem to act appropriately in our own small-scale personal wars?
One part of me thinks that humans are a waste of time and the quicker they're exterminated, the better.
Another part realises that this is exactly the reason we have a State, so that personal emotions don't count, but logic and humanity.
Yet another part thinks that killing women and children is disgusting.
I guess, in my case, it depends on how well I've slept.
However, in my post on the death penalty, I was saying what I would say and yell at people. I would not put a real contract out on them. Them thinking I had done would be sufficient to appease my hatred.
Originally posted by shavixmirThem thinking I had done would be sufficient to appease my hatred
I don't know if it is morally justifiable or not.
One part of me thinks that humans are a waste of time and the quicker they're exterminated, the better.
Another part realises that this is exactly the reason we have a State, so that personal emotions don't count, but logic and humanity.
Yet another part thinks that killing women and children ...[text shortened]... a real contract out on them. Them thinking I had done would be sufficient to appease my hatred.
Oh, I see. I misunderstood, then. 🙂
---
Yes, I would agree that the purpose of a state would be to keep the order, so to speak. The problem as I see it (and I've said this in the spirituality forum - hope this isn't regarded as spam), is that we seem to make too much difference between us and them. That discussion was in regard to moral. Anything that hurts me or my love ones are considered of evil nature, and anything else will be good. So long as it only hurts them, I can live with it.
That sort of mentality is imprinted in most of us, and that's why we are able to close our eyes to all the horrors in the world that doesn't directly affect us.
The solution then, as I see it, is for everyone to start thinking about everyone else as us. Humans. Or living things in general. That way it would seem pointless to harm others since we are clearly harming our own. As long as we can maintain that "they" are different from us, we'll be able to keep hurting "them" in the most abominable of ways.
I realize that my suggestion is both idealistic and unrealistic.
Just a thought...Does this organization publish any info on the number of Iraqi deaths/casualties during any three-consecutive-year period when Saddam, Uday and Qusay were running the show? It would be good for comparison purposes? 25,000 dead could have been a slow month for the Husseins, considering the mass graves we've been finding over there...
Originally posted by TheBloopYes there are.
Just a thought...Does this organization publish any info on the number of Iraqi deaths/casualties during any three-consecutive-year period when Saddam, Uday and Qusay were running the show? It would be good for comparison purposes? 25,000 dead could have been a slow month for the Husseins, considering the mass graves we've been finding over there...
But it all fades into comparison with the 500.000 children killed by UN sactions between 1990 and 2000.
I've posted extensively on this topic before.