Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Today: Overreacting, but still...
I got an email forward from someone today that was all about this guy in Iraq who's a sculptor who made some sculpture of a soldier mourning and an Iraqi child 'comforting' him to say thank you to American troops for their sacrifices in his country, and ultimately for his country's liberation. The forward went on to suggest that the reason we never see things like that on TV is because our media is obsessed with flashier topics like boob flashes and political intrigue, not heartwarming stories.
Upon reading it a few times, my initial response to the email wasn't really the right response to what was ultimately just a dig at the media in our country--I do think we should be supporting our troops, let me just say that before I post this, which was my first response to the forward.
Dear A__,
The picture didn't load, so I don't know what it actually looks like, but I'm sure it's a beautiful statue. I know that it's a beautiful sentiment. It's a great thing that the heroic efforts of our troops have been imortalized like that.
I can tell you right now, though, that the reason we don't hear about this statue not because of the media's obsession with gore and such. All you have to do to find heart-warming stories is watch daytime tv: it's full of those heart-warming stories and life-changing dr. phil sorts of things. The real reason those things aren't being shown is because our country is worried about the people who have died, not about the Iraqis 'we've freed.' It's sad, but it's true. Our country needs to take care of itself and its people, at home and abroad. Our troops, though seen by many, like the sculptor of that statue, as liberators, are seen by others as menaces and occupiers hell-bent on robbing this all ready starving country of one of its few valuable resources.
And why shouldn't they? That has, historically been our policy all throughout the last century. I mean, my god, we MADE Saddam Hussein as powerful as he was to get at their oil before. The United States (as well as other countries) traded arms with Hussein throughout the 70's and 80's. It has often been remarked that when Saddam was gassing Kurds, he was doing so with chemical weapons manufactured in Rochester, New York. Sure, he was a menace, sure he killed thousands of his people, but he did not create himself. He needed to go, that's for certain. Was it our duty to oust him? If your neighbor's husband is abusive, is it your job to go into their house, smash everything in the livingroom and throw the man out onto the street? I don't think so.
Further, the leadership of this country went storming into Iraq without the agreement of the rest of the world. Bush says that when in regards to our national safety, we don't need the world's approval. Sure, we can all agree with that, but it was all ready belived, before our troops were even in Iraq (which they were ill-equipped for, as has been pointed out) , that there were no WMD. And if there were, Saddam was certainly not aiming them at us or selling them to terrorists.
There is NO connection between a secular dictator (Hussein) and Al Quaeda, which is an extremist religeous group. It was widely known in the Islamic world that Osama Bin Laden hated Saddam Hussein and his secular government.
We need a change. Weather the Iraqis praise our 'liberation' or not, there were big mistakes made in the setting-up of this war effort. People, many people, have died because of poor planning by our leaders. That's not right. Our country needs a change, so we can get back to what we need to do: provide for our own safety and security--be that National Defense or ensuring that everyone has good quality, affordable healthcare. The present administration hasn't truely dealt with either of those issues.
I'm sorry if that's in dissagreement with your feelings on the matter, but if you're going to send me email forwards, you're going to get responses like this on occasion.
Love,
Matt
I got an email forward from someone today that was all about this guy in Iraq who's a sculptor who made some sculpture of a soldier mourning and an Iraqi child 'comforting' him to say thank you to American troops for their sacrifices in his country, and ultimately for his country's liberation. The forward went on to suggest that the reason we never see things like that on TV is because our media is obsessed with flashier topics like boob flashes and political intrigue, not heartwarming stories.
Upon reading it a few times, my initial response to the email wasn't really the right response to what was ultimately just a dig at the media in our country--I do think we should be supporting our troops, let me just say that before I post this, which was my first response to the forward.
Dear A__,
The picture didn't load, so I don't know what it actually looks like, but I'm sure it's a beautiful statue. I know that it's a beautiful sentiment. It's a great thing that the heroic efforts of our troops have been imortalized like that.
I can tell you right now, though, that the reason we don't hear about this statue not because of the media's obsession with gore and such. All you have to do to find heart-warming stories is watch daytime tv: it's full of those heart-warming stories and life-changing dr. phil sorts of things. The real reason those things aren't being shown is because our country is worried about the people who have died, not about the Iraqis 'we've freed.' It's sad, but it's true. Our country needs to take care of itself and its people, at home and abroad. Our troops, though seen by many, like the sculptor of that statue, as liberators, are seen by others as menaces and occupiers hell-bent on robbing this all ready starving country of one of its few valuable resources.
And why shouldn't they? That has, historically been our policy all throughout the last century. I mean, my god, we MADE Saddam Hussein as powerful as he was to get at their oil before. The United States (as well as other countries) traded arms with Hussein throughout the 70's and 80's. It has often been remarked that when Saddam was gassing Kurds, he was doing so with chemical weapons manufactured in Rochester, New York. Sure, he was a menace, sure he killed thousands of his people, but he did not create himself. He needed to go, that's for certain. Was it our duty to oust him? If your neighbor's husband is abusive, is it your job to go into their house, smash everything in the livingroom and throw the man out onto the street? I don't think so.
Further, the leadership of this country went storming into Iraq without the agreement of the rest of the world. Bush says that when in regards to our national safety, we don't need the world's approval. Sure, we can all agree with that, but it was all ready belived, before our troops were even in Iraq (which they were ill-equipped for, as has been pointed out) , that there were no WMD. And if there were, Saddam was certainly not aiming them at us or selling them to terrorists.
There is NO connection between a secular dictator (Hussein) and Al Quaeda, which is an extremist religeous group. It was widely known in the Islamic world that Osama Bin Laden hated Saddam Hussein and his secular government.
We need a change. Weather the Iraqis praise our 'liberation' or not, there were big mistakes made in the setting-up of this war effort. People, many people, have died because of poor planning by our leaders. That's not right. Our country needs a change, so we can get back to what we need to do: provide for our own safety and security--be that National Defense or ensuring that everyone has good quality, affordable healthcare. The present administration hasn't truely dealt with either of those issues.
I'm sorry if that's in dissagreement with your feelings on the matter, but if you're going to send me email forwards, you're going to get responses like this on occasion.
Love,
Matt
