Is it worth it?
Let’s take a step back for a moment. This is a bit of a vague number on first glance, hell, it’s a range as well.
What does “Documented civilian deaths from violence” really mean?
Does this tally the constant background crime always present in a region?
How about the victims and criminals, does it merely count Iraqi civilians or aid workers and foreigners in the area as well?
These are all important distinctions that can significantly alter the meaning of the figure. Regardless, over 100,000 lives are being attributed to the persistent conflict in the Iraq and its neighbors. With the U.S. being the most dominant force in this war among the NATO nations, doesn’t that leave much of the blame on us?
Maybe it is the U.S.’s fault. Maybe if we had cut our conflict short long ago or never even succumbed to war in the first place 100,000 people would still be alive and well. Were the lives of some 3,000 American worth more than 100,000 Iraqi lives? That’s a question that has no real answer but deserves as much thought as one can muster.
P.S. After writing this I double-checked the way in which the toll is counted. See this page in particular to get a better sense of where each verified death fits in.
I think this is an interesting post you have here. I was just wondering what the total period of time the body count came from? Also, I think it would be interesting if you did a post on a body count of American soldiers over the last 10 years, and possibly compare it to other wars the U.S. has been involved with. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteThis is indeed a thoughtful post, as Julie notes! How we conceive of items we when we code data has consequences for the results that emerge from the data analysis. Figures can be skewed based on how one draws the lines. If you two are interested in this I'd suggest reading up on research methodologies!
ReplyDelete