Why, when we question the killing of civilians in Iraq, do people .....?

Question

answer with questions about abortion? The question about abortion is about the belief of abortion being he killing of a baby or not as opposed to the obvious killing of innocent people by the US military in Iraq. These questions are not mutually inclusive. We can all agree that the killing of a walking, talking individual innocent individual is murder but we cannot agree that abortion, at certain times of pregnancy, is murder.

I believe that 'the right to life people, are venting in such a manner that they are copping out of the reality of American atrocities in Iraq.

Answer 1

Hey Bruno, your on the wrong side of the river.....

The Millions of deaths in Iraq are the direct results of the fine folks who are strapping bombs on their butts, and loading their cars with explosives and driving into crowds of civilian Iraqis.

As for the body count from combat with UN forces, those would be Arabs, Turks, Palestinians, Libyans, Egyptians, Lebanese and a multitude of other Muslim 'freedom fighters' who have infiltrated the Iranian country side. There are a few Iranian FORMER military in the count, but as we saw when the UN forces first entered the country of Iran, the Iranian Military shed their uniforms and blended into the population, some dressing as women.

Atrocities? Stripping prisoners naked just doesn't strike me as atrocious as Saddam's stripping off his citizens flesh, gouging out their eyes, throwing them into plastics shredders, feeding them to wild animals. But I guess it's a cultural difference, hey?

Answer 2

i think it is a defensive mechanism. as you can see from the answers people some how deny and/or justify USA actions and all the killings. people use words like intentional or non-intentional killing! however they forget or at least try to forget that all the so called non-intentional killings and the suicide bombings are the direct result of the USA invasion!

how could anyone didn't not realize that the main reasons behind these suicide bombings unless they are trying to some how deny this fact?  US A's invasion is directly and indirectly responsible for all the death in Iraq. no one can deny this bitter fact.  peace

Answer 3

Abortion deliberately kills babies who didn't do anything yet except fulfill their biological commands.Innocent civilians dying in war is not the prime objective of war,rather it's the opposite killing your enemy.That way war is justified and abortion isn't.

Answer 4

Sadly, the truth is that America has been highjacked by a really large group of terrorists called the Republican Party. They want to perpetuate the 'war' for as long as possible in order to make a buck on arms production. If this causes the Muslims to counter attack in whatever way they can, thats okay, the Republicans can use that to justify taking away our freedoms in the name of 'Security'.

Answer 5

Over 50 people died from suicide bombers today, those weren't American bombers.  My point is that you are painting all atrocities as American instead of giving credit to those who deserve it most the terrorist who really do want to blow up and kill everything that offends their foreign sensibilities.

I do agree abortion and war crimes should be separate and not lumped together.

Answer 6

An answerer states that the killings in Iraq are not deliberate.  Perhaps some are indiscriminate or just inadvertent but these are trained killers - of course most are deliberate.  

If you see a non-Yank-looking guy amongst a group of children and chuck a grenade, the kids deaths are not killings, they are 'collateral damage' - a lovely Yankee lie.  The guy,who may never have had a violent thought in his life, has, of course, become a terrorist by the very act of being killed by a Yank.

Answer 7

at least someone realises that America is acting way too wicked in Iraq , why in first place America attcaked Iraq, what if Muslims attack America saying that we don't like your democracy because it makes people too vulgar. whether some country is run under dictatorship or democracy its not America's problem.

Answer 8

I really do wonder how that can be related.  Civilians die because terrorists and anti-Iraqi militias are fighting with civilians all around and even killing innocents themselves to get different sects fighting each other.

Answer 9

You do have a bit of a point, but you need to add more context. Note that the killing of civilians in Iraq is almost never deliberate.  Or if you do feel it is deliberate then follow your own reasoning and admit that some people may think it is deliberate but we cannot all agree that killing of civilians is deliberate (I am excluding the isolated individual instances where there was clear deliberate murder of civilians by US troops in disregard of their own instructions).

Since, to call something murder the killing has to be deliberate we would have to say that there is hardly any "murder" of civilians in Iraq.

And there is certainly not a direct moral equivalence with abortion though it is debatable to people on different sides of the issue as to which one is more significant.  Abortion is the unquestionably deliberate killing of an unborn fetus which some people think is a life and some do not.  On the other hand civilian deaths in Iraq are largely accidental killing of people who we all agree are humans.

Another way to think of it is this: How do you compare a pilot who consciously drops a bomb that may or may not kill a civilian with someone who consciously kills a fetus that may or may not be human?  Do you find a vast difference?  For the sake of argument leave aside the people who are confident that a fetus is a human life.  You are suggesting that invariably the person dropping a bomb is wrong even though that person may be carrying out a mission intended to reduce a terrorists ability to kill even more humans.

You have to acknowledge that while these are not morally equivalent some people can quite justly think that abortion is a greater evil.  Especially given that in any 3 month period there are more deaths due to abortion than there were civilian deaths in Iraq in the entire span of the current war - even by the most exaggerated estimates of civilian deaths.

I don't know if it changes your mind but this should at least help you respect people who think the priority is abortion. From the point of view of many people it is completely humane and reasonable.

And also be aware that there are many who think that the real answer is to reduce both rather than trading them off against each other.  That makes the most sense.

EDIT:

Bruno, I read your comments and I read your link. And I am sorry, but I do not consider the site or Dahr Jamail to fall into the realm of what I consider to be credible journalism. His claims and assertions are so mind bogglingly absurd and unsubstantiated as to call into the realm of fringe conspiracy theorist, not even mainstream oppostion.  As someone who grew up in the Middle East and whose family lived through the first invasion of Kuwait this is obvious thought it may not be so to all those following it from a distance.  If you can reproduce his claims in a major news publication, even an anti American Arab one like Al Jazeera (in an editorial piece, not an opinion piece) I will give it more credence.

Some rather glaring distortions and untruths - He claims "without any evidence of a threat to Saudi Arabia, and King Fahd believed Iraq had no intention of invading his country, President Bush vowed to defend Saudi Arabia".  Au contraire, my friend - the thread to Saudi Arabia was rather obvious.  Saddam invaded Kuwait completely without warning and provocation. As my brother drove to work that morning he drove by the Iraqi tanks and wondered what they were - it was that much of a surprise.  That was followed rapidly by a massing of Iraqi troops and armor on the Kuwaiti Saudi border.  There is never a reason for any gulf arab state to mass troops on a border for benign reasons and you will never see it happen for innocuous reasons. The threat and intent was obvious.  The Saudi regime urgently requested western assistance and to reduce the likelihood of arab resistance added troops from Arab countries to the anti Iraqi coalition on their border. *This included Syrian troops who were generally regarded as unfriendly to both the US and Saudi*.  Such was the degree of their panic.  And the Syrian troops (and I believe Egyptian too) participated actively in the ground invasion.  The first troops to enter Kuwait city were Arab, not american.

Lies and distortions work with the ignorant, but not everyone is ignorant.

And I could not find any reference to a million civilians being killed but in either case I would not give much consideration to such a claim from a raving fanatic.  If you can show me such claims from the UN, Iraqi Govt, a responsible NGO, etc. I will consider it. I will even consider it from an NGO not remotely susceptible to western pressure like doctors without borders.

And to allay your concerns let me point out that I am not referring to FOX news reporters as sources.  They are only marginally more credible as sources. Extremists or apologists on either side of the debate to not add value. For more credible sources of information check out out www.michaeltotten.com

There are many more errors in Dahr's work but I won't point them all out here in the interest of time and my aching fingers.

2nd EDIT:

Mr Blobby: You said "If you see a non-Yank-looking guy amongst a group of children and chuck a grenade, the kids deaths are not killings, they are 'collateral damage...".  I fully agree that this example would constitute deliberate killing of civilians.  If you can provide me half a dozen credible examples of this exact scenario occuring with apparent acquiescence from militatry/civilian authorites and not as violations of orders I will concede that US troops are systematically committing war crimes.  I have not seen this and I would love to know the basis of your claim.

And when I say "credible" claim, I don't include "I met some non Yank looking guy who was completely certain that US troops were killing civilians".  I am looking for verifiable reports from journalistic sources with some shred of objective evidence behind them - like independent interviewing of civilians, trials in courts, verification by major human rights groups or something like that.

Answer 10

In any war, all people suffer to include the soldiers either by

death or injury. Having been a soldier for 22yrs of my life

I saw and experienced suffering myself while in Viet-nam.

The problem is so far the U.S. likes wars and are the causes

of the many sufferings of people as a whole, and that is why

it is high time that this government starts talking instead of

shooting, because no-one wins no matter what the people

in the government say.

Defending a nation is needed , but going out and attacking

a nation is totallly different, and for the United States to keep

on saying they are in Irag to prevent Irag from attacking us,

insults our intelligence.

Answer 11

Uh-huh.

Answer 12

they use any excuse to climb on their soap box and rant about abortion.