...of note...

October 12th, 2006

An article in yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle* reported that an estimated 600,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed thusfar in the war. What did I find in reading it? After getting about three-quarters of the way through, it dawned on me that I had just read paragraph after paragraph of explanations as to how the numbers were arrived at...paragraph after paragraph citing various researchers (including Iraqi and U.S. military), various studies, estimations. What was lacking? Any indication whatsoever that something very wrong is going on, any expression of, even a hint at, remorse for what has happened; going further, that if we believe we live in a democratic society, that that in fact makes us responsilble at some level, if not directly then certainly indirectly. No; instead, we are presented facts, pure and cold, a plethora of cited rhetoric from intellectuals to make it seem all the more credible, while at the same time throwing the dust of obfuscation in our faces which, in fact, only further legitimizes their position as the stakeholders of knowledge and credence.

And from another angle, what does this article, this kind of reporting, say about us as a society? That we have become all-too inured to violence, to its everyday commonplace-ness? That we do in fact take its occurence far too much for granted? Does it also somehow affirm the notion that the news would't be the news without it, that violence sells?

How about a different "estimation"? How many times greater is the number of Iraqi dead to U.S. dead in the war thusfar? If around 600,000 Iraqi civilians have died, and 2800 U.S. military personnel have died, that comes out to about 214 times greater, give or take...this means that for every U.S. casualty, there are 214 Iraqi casualties...is it worth the price?

~Suvian

* "New estimate puts death toll for Iraqi civilians at 600,000", 10.11.2006 SF Chronicle