In 1917 a North American senator, Hiram Johnson, wrote, "The first casualty when war comes, is truth." In the light of recent events it would appear that truth was cloaked in secrecy long before official hostilities in Iraq began. The new mantra for the 21st Century should be "the first and last casualties of war are civilians."
Recent reports are now indicating that perhaps 55,000 civilians have lost their lives in Iraq since the US invasion in March 2003. Compared to the almost 400 "Coalition" servicemen who won't be returning home, the cost to the Iraqi people has been enormous. Could life have been any more dangerous under Saddam's dictatorship? For all the atrocities committed in Hussein's name, were 7000 people disappearing every month? Innocent men, women and children are dieing at a ratio of almost 400 to 1 against enlisted coalition service personnel. Yet the US claims to be using sophisticated weapons capable of pinpoint accurate targeting.
Some years ago a Billy Connolly sketch accurately summed up the futility of war. The comedian was commenting upon the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Money was no longer going to be spent on developing a nuclear arsenal, instead it would be spent upon nice, safe conventional weapons. Billy pointed out that no one died in the first two World Wars because, until the very end, everyone was using harmless conventional weapons. Today, coalition troops are apparently only using "conventional weapons" in Iraq and 55,000 civilians are now dead. Could Iraq's supposed Weapons of Mass Destruction have caused harm on such a large scale to US, British and Australian citizens?
The largest single terrorist act on the United States, on September 11th, 2000, resulted in the tragic deaths of approximately 3,000 people. No excuses can every be made for such an event. Yet, in reply 55,000 Iraqis have had their lives ripped from them. How many among this number, women and children, were Al-Qaeda supporters? For a professed Christian, George W Bush shows little respect for the sixth commandment, "Thou shalt not kill."
On Remembrance Day 2003, the group Women for Peace attended the service at the War Memorial in Melbourne. Between them they carried a simple banner with the words, "Ban Wars. Peace in the 21st Century." Throughout, they were heckled and abused as somehow being "Un-Australian." Yet Remembrance Day is about meditating on the brutality, waste and destruction of war. It is about how war tears apart people's lives, destroys families and raises homes to the ground. Not only should we contemplate all lives lost in wars on this day, but also consider efforts to prevent further conflict. Remembrance Day is about peace.
As Australia turns away Kurdish refugees and asylum seekers, trying to escape the cycle of death in their country we continue to forget that war kills innocents. Nothing is as valuable as a human life and the United States, with her allies, continues to run up an unserviceable debt in Iraq.
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
Recent reports?
13.11.2003 16:00
Medact estimated that the deaths consist of "Between 7,800 and 9,600 Iraqi civilians" and "394 Coalition combatants" while "estimates of the number of Iraqi military deaths range from 13,500 - 45,000".
The 55,000 civilian casualty estimate distortion seems to be circulating a lot, and I'm sure it's not deliberate, but it does need to be countered. The truth is harsh enough on its own without articles such as this by al jazeera having to misrepresent Medact:
Andrew
Medact link
13.11.2003 16:04
Andrew