<p>but Mini- people in London speak English. Of course we are going to be more concerned about them than people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Mali or whereever there may be innocents being killed.
( since I apparently have been misconstrued on other threads- let me be clear- I am not tonque in cheek because it isn’t funny- but I think it may explain partly of why we are “upset” about bombings in London, but not so much in Jerusalem or Japan- we ( in the US) seem to care more if we perceive the victims to be “like us” English speaking and preferably caucasian.)
Why else could we just shrug off the numbers of people that die everyday because of lack of potable water?</p>
<p>Speak for yourself, ek4. Just because the popular media doesn’t cover third world attacks like they do “runaway brides” doesn’t mean people here aren’t aware and doing what they can to assist. And I have an answer for your question–it’s because it’s a slow drip instead of a spectacular tsunami. I didn’t perceive a lack of response on the part of Americans to that disaster, even though 99% of the victims were non-english-speaking and not white.</p>
<p>Yeah, EK4, speak for yourself. I rarely agree with you, but rarely find you offensive. Post #41 gets real close.</p>
<p>All right, but at least she tried to answer the question. I don’t see much in the way of outpouring of sympathy for our friends the Iraqi people. In fact, in a year on this board, I don’t think I’ve heard it even once.</p>
<p>Well you must have a short memory
Do you not recall that the US pledged less money to Indonesia than was being spent on the 2005 inauguration parties until we were shamed into sending more?</p>
<p>How many people still care about Indonesia? How many people are investigating why it was so destructive in the first place ( look up deforestation)
I guess you haven’t read all the snarky comments on the boards about Live8 that of course was an effort to broaden interest into world poverty.
I stand by my observation but I must applaud the British reaction-
sent to me by a paramedic in London</p>
<p>Many years ago, an elderly Londoner was asked by a news crew to give his reaction to the latest bomb outrage committed by the IRA. What would he say to those who carried out this atrocity, they wanted to know. Being of the generation that had lived through the Blitz in WW2, his comment was
“F—you, we have been bombed by professionals!”</p>
<p>Mini, that’s a good point. It’s because we don’t think of London as a war zone, any more than we thought of NYC as a war zone (some still don’t). It should be a wake up call. They are war zones, because the terrorists have made them so. Everyone’s familiar with Medecins sans frontieres…it’s about time we got familiar with terroristes sans frontieres as well. That’s reality.</p>
<p>mini: Let’s make sure you hear it at least once. Every time I hear of another bombing in Iraq I think of not only the victims but the victims families and the many who are injured who won’t receive the medical care they would in London or New York. But I also think of who is doing the bombing and what kind of world they would create if they ran Iraq. And I think of the 300,000 plus who were murdered by Hussein, or those who had their tongues cut out, or their ears cut off. Not a day goes by that I don’t think of these things. And I think of the poor Shiites who George Bush Senior left out to dry after the Gulf War - something that he, and Schwarzkopf and Powell still haven’t owned up to. We live in an imperfect world. I only hope we can get it 75 percent right this time around.</p>
<p>
The US government didn’t need to “pledge” any more money than it did because its private citizens had already vastly out"pledged" the governments of the rest of the world combined. That’s just how we do things here. I will never understand the negativity you folks feel toward our country. Never.</p>
<p>I am pretty disgusted
so what is everyone elses reason why we are up in arm about bombings in London- but when we read reports that over 100,000 civilians including children have died in Iraq what do we say?
What was said about Rachel Corrie who tried to prevent destruction in the Gaza Strip?
On these boards she was called a nutcase who deserved what she got.
I haven’t noticed a lot of sympathy on these boards for those who are trying to prevent more deaths</p>
<p>"Let’s make sure you hear it at least once. Every time I hear of another bombing in Iraq I think of not only the victims but the victims families and the many who are injured who won’t receive the medical care they would in London or New York. "</p>
<p>thank you. It IS nice to hear. Having lived in Iran, and England, and in India, I am no friends of terrorists, whatever they happen to call themselves. And in India, I am closely in touch on a personal level of what “business as usual” looks like, without terrorists of the bombmaking variety, and it isn’t pretty. </p>
<p>As for deforestation in southeast Asia, let me link to myself: shantinik.blogspot.com - see the fourth blog down “Drumsticks…and Malaysian Mangroves”.</p>
<p>ya know we are up in arms if some one implies we might be RACIST-
but we have no problem stating that we are bigoted against homosexuals and don’t beleive they should have the same freedoms.
If pressed we probably will quote the Bible or some such, conviently forgetting that the same source was also used to justify slavery.</p>
<p>Can’t we just be sad about the London bombings for five minutes without immediately bringing comparisons of the Oh-you-think-you-have-it-rough-what-about-Iraq kind?
I mean, time and a place, no? A few hours of mourning without political mudslinging would be nice.</p>
<p>Fair enough…but WHEN is the Iraq time (at least on this board, before now, it was never…) That’s all I asked.</p>
<p>It makes me sick. These terrorists shouldn’t punish innocent civilians for belonging to the country that they do. Besides, their opinion of the West is warped…</p>
<p>A better perspective than I’ve had time to write:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>courtesy of Joshua Marshall </p>
<p>Mini, part of the problem about talking about the Iraqi civilian casualties is because it’s hard to pin down the scope. The number 100,000 has been bandied about and my gut says that’s high. But it’s certainly in the tens of thousands. And my gut didn’t feel good about reading the matter of fact report of a company grade officer who said that when his unit first got to Iraq, the ratio of insurgents/civilians killed was 1:4 but by the time they left it was 1:1. Regardless of the numbers really are, all the cumulative “Ooopsies!” are breeding more resentment, more lethal hostility. 95 percent of the Iraqi insurgents are home-grown domestics who whose sole motivation is our occupation. The other 5 percent are the more proximate, less sophisticated, “terrorists of opportunity.” I’m afraid that the smarter, more long-term oriented folks aren’t messing with Iraq. They’re planning things like London, Madrid, and worse…and won’t be within 500 miles of Iraq.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, our military is mostly either in Iraq, getting ready to go to Iraq, or recovering from Iraq. The operations tempo is wearing down both units and equipment. And if a major outbreak somewhere can’t be handled by the Air Force, we’re down to sending in the Boy Scouts, though the 101st Fighting Keyboardists and the College Republicans might be better choices. Or maybe Focus on the Family should tell all their congregations that every family needs to have someone enlist…yeah, that’s the ticket.</p>
<p>“A few hours of mourning without political mudslinging would be nice.”</p>
<p>Well Im heading over to sinners alley to get blitzed- anybody want to join me?</p>
<p>
That may be Juan Cole’s perspective, but others think it’s quite a bit more complicated.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In January 2005 Iraqi intelligence service director General Mohamed Abdullah Shahwani said that Iraq’s insurgency consited of at least 40,000 hardcore fighters, out of a total of more than 200,000 part-time fighters and volunteers who provide intelligence, logistics and shelter. Shahwani said the resistance enjoyed wide backing in the Sunni provinces of Baghdad, Babel, Salahuddin, Diyala, Nineveh and Tamim. Shahwani said the Baath, with a core fighting strength of more than 20,000, had split into three factions. The main one, still owing allegiance to jailed dictator Saddam Hussein, is operating out of Syria. It is led by Saddam’s half-brother Sabawi Ibrahim al-Hassan and former aide Mohamed Yunis al-Ahmed, who provide funding to their connections in Mosul, Samarra, Baquba, Kirkuk and Tikrit. Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri is still in Iraq. Two other factions have broken from Saddam, but have yet to mount any attacks. Islamist factions range from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s al-Qaeda affiliate to Ansar al-Sunna and Ansar al-Islam.</p>
<p>A picture of the composition of the insurgency, though in constant flux, has come into somewhat greater focus. London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies estimates roughly 1,000 foreign Islamic jihadists have joined the insurgency. And there is no doubt many of these have had a dramatic effect on perceptions of the insurgency through high-profile video-taped kidnappings and beheadings. However, American officials believe that the greatest obstacles to stability are the native insurgents that predominate in the Sunni triangle. Significantly, many secular Sunni leaders were being surpassed in influence by Sunni militants. This development mirrors the rise of militant Shia cleric and militia leader Moqtada al-Sadr vis-</p>
<p>First, thanks to the Londoner who posted. As a NYer, I admit the thought that crossed my mind was if they can pull it off in London–which I think is far better organized to combat terrorism than NYC is–then, it’s only a matter of time before it happens again here. </p>
<p>But those who say that London seems worse to us because of racism are really out of tune with reality. London, like NYC, is a multiracial, multiethnic, multireligious,multicultural, multieverything city. Turn on the TV or look at a newspaper. The people emerging from those subway stations with cuts and scrapes and dazed and confused were Londoners with skins of every color and tourists from all over the world. </p>
<p>Some of my neighbors died on 9/11 and others lost members of their families. I assure you the victims were NOT all whites. Nor were all of them Americans. One of those who was hardest hit was a widow who is a devout Muslim; she is a Pakistani national. Her only son died on 9/11. They’ve never found his body. Her pain affected me personally a LOT. Why? Because she lives in my neighborhood. Because I witnessed her tears. Because I stood from a distance and watched his “funeral.” </p>
<p>So, please, don’t make this about racisim. It isn’t. Why does London hit me harder than Iraq? Because it hits closer to home–NOT because the people are white–many weren’t, NOT because they speak English–I doubt all did, but because they do NOT live in a war zone, because they were just regular people, going to work, and then…</p>
<p>So, yes, it’s scary, because it makes me feel PERSONALLY much more vulnerable than the deaths of people in Iraq or starvation in Africa. It’s NOT that I think that an Iraqi is worth less than a Brit or an African is worth less than an American. It’s because the bombings in London make me feel more vulnerable…in much the same way that folks on this board tend to get more upset about a college kid overdosing on alcohol during fraternity rush or a car crash in their own hometown than they would about someone who died of a rare illness–unless they happen to have known and loved someone else who died of that illness. </p>
<p>It may be immature…but reality is that it’s the deaths that remind us that we or those we love most have been or could be dead which hurt most…</p>
<p>My auntie saw the explosion 2 minutes after getting off the bus.</p>
<p>Can you believe she’s laughing? Hehe</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course. That’s why this war cannot be fought from a defensive position. There is simply no way to sit back and try to defend all the potential targets. Impossible.</p>
<p>It must be a war fought on offense – attack relentlessly and force the terrorists out of their ratholes. It’s like a probing reconnaissance mission where you project a scouting force hoping to draw enemy fire so that you can identify their positions. Force them to respond to the projection of force, knowing that our forces, while taking significant casualities, will inflict even more.</p>