Only??????

There is a weekly wrap-up of the war on a certain cable news network where the host talks and acts like a game show host.

His fake earnestness and total lack of humanity sterilizes the war and trivializes the reality of what our government has wrought in Iraq and beyond. In a recent program our perky host actually said "only about 37 U.S. troops killed [last month]". "Only"???! How dare this clown and his heartless network employ such verbiage that casts the deaths of our young men and women in terms of such profound indifference to the feelings of those close to these soldiers. To say the word "only" in this context reveals no insight into how "any" death in this war, be it soldier or civilian is the direct result of a monumentally naïve and misguided foreign policy disaster. These deaths are not just abstract casualties, they are our flesh and blood relatives and friends who have been sacrificed for some indeterminant cause that has never been coherently articulated.

So I humbly submit, no matter what the death count is, be it one or 37, for the sake of civility and respect for those who sacrificed there lives, that more care is given to how these deaths are treated. After all, they are not ball scores!

Comments

[AMCpinay]

I remember hearing him say that also and I couldn't believe he said it as though it were nothing significant or remotely important. I agree with every word you said here.

[sa]

dude,
"1 comment pending"
is becoming SO tiresome -
did you accept my comment or not.

don't leave me hanging bro.

i said some righteous shit.

yes or no? i'll post again if i know the verdict.

[sa]

what if our government
wasn't in a war,
what then?
they would have to sit on their
hands and actually deal with our
country. they'd have to sort out
health care and education. people
would have to think about minimum wage,
ceo pay and bonuses, hedgefunder pay,
and the general structure of capitalism.
actually, people would have to think about
capitalism, and its structure.
so this war happened,
and other wars will happen.
so the corporate gents, never get scrutinized.
the party continues.
the rich reap and reap.
while the poor entertain the reaper.
the money game continues,
without challenge.
we are all pawns in that game.

enjoy the magic.
this is america.
in endgame.

[Wulfstan]

Did you notice that Letterman and Conan O'Brien are sporting full beards ? I think it makes a statement that they are anti war.

When military buzz cuts became fashionable around 2000 I made a comment that the US would soon be at war.

Maybe the presures to get out of Iraq are building. Let's hope so.

[marignymitch]

Get over yourselves, folks! You need some perspective.

Thousands of lives and trillions of dollars are small prices to pay when the financial health of our corporate masters is at stake.

[dcpoff]

I live in the mid west. You would not believe how many people still have 'W' stickers and the like on their vehicles. In '04 I talked to one woman about whom she was voting for, she said "Bush, Kerry seems like a jerk." I was speechless.
That is an example of brainwashed if I ever saw it.

[AnRoistac]

We're agreed about Kevin Martin. He's been working against the stated interests of the American people, and for Big Media. I'm sure there's a big contract waiting for him on the other side of the revolving door.

Being a cable network, however, CNN doesn't use our airwaves.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

I will submit to you once again, Richard, that the Dems of the 2007 CONgress were, for the large part, as dishonest and unethical to their oaths of office, and OUR troops, as most republicants are. Especially when it came to doing ALL they COULD to save EVERY life they could. That, combined with their knowledge of torture war crimes going back 4 to 5 years, makes MANY of the current Dems in CONgress just as much in violation of their oaths to the Constitution, as the neoCONS.

I KNOW even you believe the DLC has jumped in bed with moderate republicants to create a 'one-party system' and sell-out the citizens, you've implied similar things yourself a time or two.

While one leading candidate appears to have seen a light, he's still a 'John'ny-c­ome-lately to the idea of getting ALL the troops out of Iraq quickly, just a few months ago he believed WE'd still have OUR soldiers there in 2013.

The good Governor from New Mexico has been saying, however, since long before the debates started, that he will have ALL troops out of Iraq within 12 months.

The ONLY 'outsider' ever really in the race, ALSO has the MOST foreign policy experience, of anyone still in the race.
Governor Richardson WOULD stop using OUR troops for the preznutz' laser-guided diplomacy.

[pennyfortheguy]

Don't look at me, I pray to Keith Olbermann.
Can one become over-saturated in sincerity?
Or does the existence of Keith explain the dearth of sensitivity everywhere else?

[desertdave]

Treating the so-called war like a ballgame is a perfect analogy. Sadly, it's not treated like the Superbowl or the World Series. It is basically reported on like a pre-season game.
You know...doesn't really count. So "only 37" fits right in with the program.

[Garee]

That there is an audience for this "network" says volumes. The ones who watch this netwrok went shopping" after 9/11 and have never stopped. Many of them think these last 7 years have been a wonderful time full of interesting news about important subjects: Britney Spears, L. Lohan, you know improtant issues. If there are 3 or 4 thousand less Americans alive or 30 or 40 thousand wounded Americans more than 7 years ago, that's the price someone (not them) has to pay for freedom.
God help them when their time comes!

[SirReal1]

Many of the posters here have made note of a "particular personality type" that provide a significant pool of viewers that watch these kinds of reports with satisfaction and engage in no manner of critical thought about the "reality" of the content.
I had the unfortunate experience of engaging one such individual in Richard's last blog:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-belzer/happy-new-year_b_79013.html

That such individuals exist at all is disturbing on many levels. That they can actually rationalize their attitudes, and defend them, is, quite frankly, frightening!

I've commented, on one of the other posts here, on one aspect that I believe has contributed to the creation of this phenomena. I do believe that there is another, somewhat subtler shift in our "social consciousness" that has brought us to this point.

Those who have read my comments of the past may recognize this argument, though I am applying it in a new context.

(cont)

[yowza1]

Yes I have seen this Bush foil (briefly, as I had to turn the channel before I puked). What a sad appendage to this dreadful occupation of Iraq by US troops.

[nellie]

The occupation doesn't affect his life, so it's meaningless to him. It's a common problem among people who rush us into war—people who did everything they could to avoid service—and people who report on war as if it were a tennis match—people who did everything they could to avoid service.

Thanks for this simple but profound reminder of what our casualty count really means.

[3rdCitizen]

Personally, I'm no longer offended by media types trivializing the horrors of military actions approved by our government. I'm too disgusted by the sickness in our culture that they're reflecting. Those pundits, politicos and propagandists are just the moral pustules on the body of the plague victim.
When Ronald Reagan ordered an airstrike on Libya, we were all supposed to feel virile and triumphant and proud. The deaths of innocent civilians (including Qaddafi's infant daughter) were to be regarded as a good thing because they made Qaddafi feel bad! It didn't matter that the attack failed to reduce the number of terrorist incidents in the world. Or that it apparently motivated the bombing of the Lockerbie flight. We'd blown stuff up and killed people, and we felt good about ourselves!
In such a culture, how easy it is to sell war as a video game adventure in which the good guys destroy the bad guys, and good guy casualties are acceptable because they laid down their lives for their country, and civilian casualities are acceptable because they're just Collatoral Damage with no more reality than a statistic. What does the public get outraged about? Any breech of "good taste" that rubs its face in the actual horrors that result from its military actions. After all, the truth is unpatriotic.
But at least we have a strong movement in this country to stop legal abortions! That's because of how much we respect the sanctity of human life.