The fundamental problem with an argument like that is the implicit suggestion that it's okay to force civilians in some other place -- wherever "over there" happens to be at the moment -- to suffer the consequences of our wars, so that we don't have to. It suggests that we're going to subject innocent people on the other side of the globe to the horrors of war, because our lives are more valuable than theirs.
This is implicit in the oft-repeated -- and completely false -- argument for why the administration ordered American troops into Iraq. And the people on the receiving end of such an arrogant assertion are bound to understand this.
Many Iraqis have fled their homes to escape violence since the 2003 fall of Saddam Hussein, the immigration minister said Tuesday.Plus:
The rate has swollen in the past six months of Shiite-Sunni killings, Immigration Minister Abdul-Samad Sultan told reporters.
Some 890,000 Iraqis have moved to Jordan, Iran and Syria since Hussein’s fall, Sultan said.
We estimate that as of July, 2006, there have been 654,965 (392,979–942,636) excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence of the war, which corresponds to 2.5% of the population in the study area.That makes roughly 1.5 million Iraqis -- or one out of every twenty -- who aren't there anymore.
And nearly one million people across the region who were driven from their homeland by our liberation. (And that assumes the Iraqi minister's estimate is accurate. Others have placed the refugee count at well over a million.)
Wanna lay bets on who those people will side with, if you push them to choose between us and the terrorists?
Are we safer yet?
(Tap hit to Meteor Blades @ Next Hurrah.)