Another response to Terrorism: "Good" vs. "Evil":
Another response to Terrorism: "Good" vs. "Evil":
From US Reports: Worldwide Terrorist Attacks – 651 for the Last Year:
"And the preliminary NCTC report said there were 651 terrorist attacks in 2004 classified as "significant," with 1,907 people killed. And the preliminary NCTC report said there were 651 terrorist attacks in 2004 classified as "significant," with 1,907 people killed."
So, 1,600 dead Americans vs. 1,907 people worldwide killed by terrorists. Hmmmm, who's the greater evil here: Bush or the terrorists? Obviously, the cost of war is high. So is the cost of peace, when there are so many people out there who are opposed to the concept for "holy" reasons.
By the way, one of the reasons there appear to have been more terrorist attacks last year is because of new reporting methods. It's just like when the police institute new domestic violence policies -- all of a sudden the number of D.V. reports skyrockets! Not because all of a sudden everyone's beating on each other, but because now the cops are recognizing acts of domestic violence as such, when before they may have written them off, classified them as something else, or maybe because people wouldn't call to report in the first place because they didn't know the police were interested, until they started educating the public. I'm sure one reason the stats are so high for terrorist attacks are that people are reporting and classifying them as such, across a broader spectrum than before. Also, I take exception to the 198 "terrorist attacks" in Iraq as counting toward the total. Iraq is a war zone. Wars by definition consist of a series of planned terrorist attacks. I think they should be classified as "civilian attacks in a war zone" or something like that instead.
And, one final thing to consider: A mortally wounded animal is most dangerous. Perhaps the terrorist networks are simply thrashing about in a fury before gasping their last breath. You have to admit that a lot of the terrorist attacks of late have an air of desperation about them.
Bonnie
Rob's reply
>> So, 1,600 dead Americans vs. 1,907 people worldwide killed by terrorists. Hmmmm, who's the greater evil here: Bush or the terrorists? <<
Bush is the greater single evil. Terrorists may have killed 1,907 people collectively, but no single terrorist has killed that many.
In addition, many of these terrorist attacks were reprisals for Bush's invasion of Iraq. He arguably bears some responsibility for them too.
More important, you failed to count all the innocent victims in Iraq and Afghanistan who are dead because of Bush. Instead, you're comparing US soldiers in Iraq to innocent victims worldwide. Can you say "apples and oranges"? The fair comparison would be US soldiers killed in Iraq to US soldiers killed worldwide by terrorists, or total people killed in Iraq to total people killed worldwide by terrorists.
And you still can't or won't acknowledge the central facts of this conflict. Fact: There were no WMDs in Iraq. Fact: There were no terrorist organizations in Iraq. Fact: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and wasn't an imminent threat to the US.
Fact: Bush and his people intentionally ignored the intelligence that argued against invading Iraq. Fact: They "fixed" the case to justify their preemptive strike, as we've learned from the Downing Street memo. Fact: They said they were still deciding what to do and consulting with allies when they had made up their minds. Fact: They had no justification for sending American soldiers to their deaths other than the ones they fabricated out of thin air.
>> By the way, one of the reasons there appear to have been more terrorist attacks last year is because of new reporting methods. <<
Could be...but the accurate comparison is about 100,000 killed in Iraq to 1,907 killed worldwide by terrorists. The reporting methods hardly affect this gross disparity.
>> Also, I take exception to the 198 "terrorist attacks" in Iraq as counting toward the total. Iraq is a war zone. <<
A "war zone" created artificially by Bush under false pretenses, you mean. That makes Bush ultimately responsible for whatever happens there.
Terrorists around the world think they're fighting a war against Western imperialism. That's definitely the case in Israel, where the Palestinians consider suicide bombing a legitimate war technique.
>> Wars by definition consist of a series of planned terrorist attacks. <<
So you agree the Bush administration planned and launched a campaign of terror against the people of Iraq? Good, we're making progress!
>> And, one final thing to consider: A mortally wounded animal is most dangerous. Perhaps the terrorist networks are simply thrashing about in a fury before gasping their last breath. <<
Are you seriously arguing Dick Cheney's position: that the opposition in Iraq is in its "final throes"? Apparently you've learned nothing from our experiences in Vietnam. I wonder how many more dead soldiers and civilians it'll take before you realize the truth.
>> You have to admit that a lot of the terrorist attacks of late have an air of desperation about them. <<
Not really. You have to admit that the war in Iraq isn't going well—that we're slowly but surely losing.
|
. . . |
|
All material © copyright its original owners, except where noted.
Original text and pictures © copyright 2007 by Robert Schmidt.
Copyrighted material is posted under the Fair Use provision of the Copyright Act,
which allows copying for nonprofit educational uses including criticism and commentary.
Comments sent to the publisher become the property of Blue Corn Comics
and may be used in other postings without permission.