Two more soldiers killed in A'stan, around the same time that the six from Sunday were arriving back in Canada. Although both of these guys were based in Petawawa, I believe they were both from New Brunswick. I think that's at least six just from N.B. this week. That's too much for such a small province to bear.
And, today, the US Defense Secretary is in Quebec City asking for Canada (and other NATO countries) to commit more troops. Poo, I say to that.
The Australians have committed 1,000 more? That's a lot. Why do I feel like the Canadians and the Aussies are the saps in this whole debacle. Maybe because our numbers are small and each death still means something. For the Americans, the numbers of deaths have become meaningless. That's even worse.
5 comments:
I don't think the death numbers have become meaningless, they're just hard to comprehend. When there are so many dead, it's hard to focus on them as individuals. That, plus the media is purposly donwplaying the events. The death of a soldier is just that- a ten second spot in between Anna Nicole and Imus, an anonymous blip on the radar overshadowed by the Duke lacrosse players and Alberto Gonzales. It's not that we don't care, it's just that there are so many forces conspiring to make sure that we do not focus on it. I blame the revenue-driven media in part, because it is their job to bring us REAL news, and they choose not to do so. I do agree to a point that most Americans would rather not dwell on the fact that we have lost more than 3000 of our soldiers, but I think they would care more if they heard more. If faces were put with the numbers, it would be different. Like you said, you stared at the faces on the newspaper- we don't get that opportunity. We don't get names, ages, hometowns, faces or families- we get numbers, and I think that is too abstract.
Sorry for the novel!!!
Oh, I forgot to say that I feel for those families in Canada that have lost soldiers. I think that each individual is worth mourning, and I'm at least glad that your country is treating the deaths as the tragedies that they are.
I'm sorry to hear about what happened.
I agree with you, Anne. When I say meaningless, I mean meaningless for the general public for exactly the reasons you state. The only place I've seen each soldier's death treated individually is on The News Hour on PBS. As they get photos of the dead, they run them one at a time, with name, rank, home town and age (it's the age that always gets me). And they are run in silence, no background music. I can't help but stop and look at their faces. The US media should provide more of that type of tribute.
I figured that's what you meant. And yes, the media should, but they're too busy scrambling to Al Sharpton press conferences to get it done.
And we don't even belong to NATO!!! But if George W says jump, we say how how?
Howard can keep doing this because there have been minimal casualties - one death in Afghanistan, and that about 3 years ago and one in Iraq (guy messing with his gun in camp). The feeling is that if there had been more deaths, or if there are in the future, then the heat will be on. Howard will be hoping like hell nothing happens this year, because its election year.
Post a Comment