[Peace-discuss] N-G letter attacks Lancet study

[Stuart Levy]

On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 10:59:22PM -0500, Laurie at advancenet.net wrote:
> Stuart,
> 
> > Estimates of many hundreds of thousands dead in Iraq -- excess deaths,
> > of people dying at rates much higher than before our 2003 invasion -- are
> > widely dismissed.  Those inclined to disbelieve them should read them:
> 
> The letter is a good one; but unfortunately those who are inclined to
> disbelieve them or what you have written are not likely to Google the
> studies or read them - much less change their minds.  You are attacking
> belief system and not merely disputing facts.

Thanks.  I don't expect Pres. Bush to read the studies, nor Henry Seiter,
whose letter of Sept. 10th this one is responding to.  But it is a much larger
group than committedly blindered right-wingers who have been minimizing
the catastrophic consequences of this war (and by extension, of war in general).

Even some people who would call themselves progressives have simply
found these estimates incredible, presumably on some of the same grounds
as Seiter does.  We've heard how careful our military is to avoid unnecessary
harm to civilians, we've been hearing endless estimates of "only" a few tens
of thousands that seem to corroborate each other, etc. etc.  How could so many
be killed without our having heard of it long since?  How could a figure
like a million possibly even be close?  Many won't look, but some will.

Some minds *do* change.  I wanted to list a couple of other cases,
and would have if the word limit hadn't been so tight:

   - Remember the Bosnian war of a dozen years ago?  There were widespread
     atrocities on several sides, but especially of the Serbian military
     against Bosnian Muslims.  Many Serbs simply refused to believe
     that their own good soldiers could have rounded up and mowed down 
     unarmed civilians.  But then it turned out that (IIRC) one of those
     soldiers had made a video.  Not only did this impress outsiders,
     it also shook up a lot of Serbs.

   - Forty years ago, when the US Supreme Court ruled that
     states could not forbid racially-mixed marriages,
     most of the population thought miscegenation still ought to be illegal.
     How many would say so today?

     In this case I don't think there was any single event that
     changed many people's minds.  Yet they have changed.
 

> > How would we feel if an invading country, even one claiming to save us
> > from tyranny, had such an effect in the US?  
> 
> We would be hypocritical and respond with irrational violence, resistance,
> defiance, and rebellion just as the people of Iraq are doing, claiming that
> our actions are legitimate while their similar actions towards us are
> illegitimate; we would hate them and carry that hatred for decades after the
> incidences has passed into history (just look at attitudes revolving around
> the US civil war and Vietnam) just as the Iraq population might.

Unfortunately I agree with you here.

Why are we in the habit of acting this way when people of
some other cultures do not?  When US soldiers who had
fought in Vietnam go there today, we often hear that they
are welcomed, in spite of having participated in vast destruction
and loss of life.   And if the past invading country gets a
label, it doesn't appear to be "evildoer".

I was charmed to read (in translation) a classic Chinese story,
"Outlaws of the Marsh".  One or another of the characters will be
travelling peacefully along until being attacked, often nearly killed,
by a bandit.  Character overcomes the attack, and... what would happen
in a Western story?  Righteous slaying of the evil attacker?  Enslavement?
Surely at least undying enmity.  Not so here.
Having demonstrated to each other that they are worthy
opponents, attacker and attackee become fast friends,
and stick by each other in further adventures.


> > Can our consciences bear this burden?
> 
> For those whom you are attempting to persuade, this does not even enter
> their consciences so it represents no burden to them. It is the old story of
> "when it happens to them, it is comedy; when it happens to me, it is
> tragedy."

Again I think I am trying to convince a much larger group than you suggest.
And many of us do look at our consciences from time to time.

    Stuart Levy