May 11th, 2008

Myanmar Zimbabwe

advertisement


Taps in Baghdad on Easter Sunday.

(AP photo/Dusan Vranic)

The sacrifices paid in Iraq

What happened
The U.S. military’s death toll in Iraq reached 4,000 after four American soldiers were killed by a roadside bomb in Baghdad on Sunday. U.S. casualties mounted last year after the Pentagon sent an addional 30,000 troops, but the “surge” helped reduce overall violence. (AP in Time.com)

What the commentators said
Most Americans have not shared in the “personal suffering” associated with this war, said USA Today in an editorial. If they had, their “support for the war—already weak—would likely erode even more.” But “tragic milestones” should serve as a reminder of “what an extraordinarily unfair share of the burden those fighting in Iraq have borne,” and of the debt of gratitude, and respect, we all owe American men and women in uniform.

“Such heavy losses are difficult to absorb, impossible to rationalize,” said Carl Hiaasen in The Miami Herald. “Nobody knows for sure how many innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed during the U.S. occupation—at least 18,600 are known to have died in 2007 alone.” Americans are only now beginning to see the “true cost” of this unnecessary war, and “young American men and women will still be coming home from Baghdad in coffins” long after President Bush is “chopping brush back on the ranch in Texas.”

Our soldiers didn’t die in vain, said Pete Hegseth in National Review Online. “Al-Qaeda’s sheer brutality, and America’s shift to a counterinsurgency strategy, caused the sympathies of local leaders and legions of young men to shift.” Once frustrated young Iraqis went off to join the insurgents; now they’re out patrolling their own neighborhoods to make sure the terrorists don’t stop their country’s march toward freedom.

And don’t forget the cost we might have paid if we hadn’t invaded, said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. The media bought the “myth” that the Bush administration “invented” the link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaida, but a new Pentagon report suggests that Iraq's terrorism ties were "were far more extensive than previously understood.”

Name:

Email Address:

Comments:

Enter character string as shown below
CAPTCHA Code

Recent comments | 5 total
lillypearl | April 13th, 2008
To "Uh" and other lefty nuts: You'd know that there were WMD's if you ever read anything credible. This war is necessary to halt Islam's treck through the world----a journey that plans to make Sharia law rule everywhere. So I ask you--what color of burka do you want your daughter and granddaughters to have to wear? Some of you think we should pull out of Iraq and send the troops to Darfur. What's the difference? There is none---both places have/had ruthless dictators greedy for power (Saddam wanted to own all of the middle east as shown in his war on Kuwait). Go whine somewhere else.....
Mary Ann | March 25th, 2008
I was wrong - al Sadar is back on the warpath: BAGHDAD - Iraqi forces clashed with Shiite militiamen Tuesday in the southern oil port of Basra and rockets rained down on the U.S.-protected Green Zone in Baghdad as followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr expanded a nationwide backlash against government crackdowns. from: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080325/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
Mary Ann | March 24th, 2008
I don't think the "surge" results are accurate. The fact that Al Sadar called off his army in August 2007 and that was when the body count for American soliders really began dropping. The last I heard, which was February 2008, al Sadar's army was still standing down. What I want to know is if al Sadar is being paid good tax $$ to stand down until the election is over?
Uh... | March 24th, 2008
Wall Street Journal editorials: Written by biased neo-cons. Can this elusive smoking gun linking Sadam and al Qaida ever be relevant? Despite costing thousands of lives, billions of dollars, and not finding any WMDs, the Iraq war is now suddenly justified because of some dubious hindsight? Nonsense. We went over there to remove non-existent WMDs, as that was the platform the Bush regime sold this war on. When there were no WMDs, there was a link to Al Qaida. But that turned out to be false, or is it? In the current political climate of America and the stranglehold the Bush regime has on our nation, it is best to remain skeptical until the American people, along with the rest of the world, are shown irrefutable and tangible proof of an immediate threat from the combined forces of Sadam and al Qaida. Until then, the war is a mistake and we all have the right to ask “what are our brave soldiers fighting and dying for?”
Mark McLaughlin | March 24th, 2008
I have lost personal friends in this conflict and I know that each of them was proud of their accomplishments. Over 6000 men died on D Day 6 June 44 compared to 4000 in 5 years. Any loss is staggaring but for the military this has been a worth while project. War haters will always rejioce in loss those of us who lost friends do not.
SEE ALL READER COMMENTS >
opinion awards

advertisement

FROM THE MAGAZINE

Good week for: The afterlife, after an Illinois man built himself a coffin to look like a giant can of Pabst Blue Ribbon beer. Until he needs the casket, Bill Bramanti, 67, is using it as a cooler.

Bad week for: Louisiana inmates, after a 400-pound black bear moved into the courtyard of the state penitentiary. “It’s like having another guard at no cost to the taxpayer,” said Warden Burl Cain.

PICK OF THE DAY'S CARTOONS MORE CARTOONS >
 
Most Read
Most E-mailed

SUBSCRIBE | PRIVACY POLICY | TERMS AND CONDITIONS | AD INFO | PRESS ROOM | JOBS | FEEDBACK | CUSTOMER SERVICE | EVENTS
© 2008 The Week Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. THE WEEK® is a registered trademark owned by Felix Dennis.
THEWEEKDAILY.COM is a trademark owned by Felix Dennis.