One thousand members of the US military are dead and suddenly it is a milestone.
I picked up the International Herald Tribune at the train station this morning and read part of it while waiting for my train (it was 10 minutes late) and most of the rest on the train.
Above the fold there were three articles, all of them focusing on issues in this post 9/11-Bush world. The first, on the left is about Airlines and their problems since 9/11?although most of the problems listed would have happened without 9/11, 9/11 merely exacerbated and accelerated the problems (low fare airlines and regional jets). The one on the right is a presidential campaign update where Kerry suggests that Bush is not conducting the war as well as he could have-that there was, as the article puts it “poor planning.”
The third article above the fold is below a few photographs: a memorial at a baseball field with one ball for each dead soldier as well as two other photos memorializing the fallen. It is headlined “In small towns, painful debate. Political fallout unclear as toll rises.” In other words, the Republicans in small town America are finally noticing that people are getting killed in Iraq.
It must be nice to live in ignorance and isolation.
(Come to think of it, it could be argued that I am, but that’s another blog entry.)
What I’m curious about is why it has taken 1,000 dead soldiers before people seem willing to talk about what’s going on? Why is it unpatriotic to suggest that the war in Iraq was not a good idea?
Written 09 September 04