Once there was a president in the Oval Office who understood the ramifications of killing innocent civilians abroad, even for an operation that might appear on its face to advance American interests. This commander-in-chief once shunned a sweeping military response to a terrorist killing of a U.S. Navy sailor because, as his highly respected biographer later noted, the president told his aides "that killing civilians in a strike against terrorists would be 'an act of terrorism itself.'"
That happened in 1985, and the president was Ronald Reagan, the man that Sarah Palin and John McCain have practically nominated for sainthood during their rallies and their TV debate shtick in 2008. But Palin and McCain have in fact dishonored Reagan, and all the leaders from both parties who have come before them, with their cavalier attitude toward how America treats other people around the globe, and how other people should perceive us. We see this in their vicious and petty high school pep rally approach to politics -- where chants of "drill baby drill" seem to be morphing dangerously closer to "kill baby kill" every passing day.
The once noble idea that U.S. military actions that kill innocents as collateral damage are a thing to be minimized and ideally avoided altogether is now a wussy concept for those arugula-eating tire-inflating wimps, now that we're in the glorious new era of American "shock and awe."
And so Palin has made a big deal -- in a soundbite the McCain campaign is recycling in a TV commercial -- about some comments that Barack Obama made last year against the way that we're fighting the war in Afghanistan. In Palin's recent words:
"Barack Obama had said that all we're doing in Afghanistan is air-raiding villages and killing civilians." Palin insisted that "such a reckless, reckless comment and untrue comment, again, hurts our cause."
First of all, you'll be shocked, shocked to learn that Obama's actual remark on Afghanistan was taken way out of context. Here's what he really said:
"We've got to get the job done there," Obama said. "And that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there."
In other words, Obama's concerns are all about how to "get the job done" over there -- which seems to contradict Palin and McCain's cartoonish portrayal of the Democratic candidate as someone who doesn't believe in U.S. "victory" abroad, although I guess you can see why it's hard for them to understand when a leader doesn't use their exact pep-rally lingo. And as this excellent analysis in the Guardian notes, Obama's words were anything but "untrue" -- at the time he said them, U.S. forces and our allies were killing civilians, albeit inadvertently, at a higher rate than the militants we are fighting in Afghanistan.
And that was last year. So far in 2008, the issue of collateral damage and innocent civilian deaths in Afghanistan has grown much worse -- much of that tracing back to a strategy that's hampered by a lack of manpower, which is tied up in John McCain and George W. Bush's surge in Iraq.
Indeed, the utter vapidity of Palin's comments that any comment about Americans killing civilians in warfare are automatically "untrue" was rendered even more ridiculous by this sad story today out of Afghanistan:
WASHINGTON — An investigation by the military has concluded that American airstrikes on Aug. 22 in a village in western Afghanistan killed far more civilians than American commanders there have acknowledged, according to two American military officials.
The military investigator’s report found that more than 30 civilians — not 5 to 7 as the military has long insisted — died in the airstrikes against a suspected Taliban compound in Azizabad.
The investigator, Brig. Gen. Michael W. Callan of the Air Force, concluded that many more civilians, including women and children, had been buried in the rubble than the military had asserted, one of the military officials said.
This is one incident, and the facts are still very much in dispute. The U.S. military says the target was a Taliban compound, and if that's so it shows how hard it is to avoid this kind of tragedy in modern warfare. That doesn't mean the problem of civilian deaths shouldn't be taken quite seriously, and thus brushed off with embarrassing pep-rally bravado.
Most importantly, killing innocent civilians is morally wrong, period, and what had happens it should be the subject of mourning, not baseless denial and an avenue for political ridicule; you'd think even a pit-bull hockey mom would have a little more human empathy, especially when the Afghan people are our allies that Palin and McCain so much say they want to deliver freedom to.
But beyond that, avoiding civilian deaths is also so critical to that victory over there that Palin and McCain talk so much about; every needless death creates more hatred toward America and our allies, and drives new converts to anti-U.S. terrorism. And that totally undermines our strategy abroad -- it ultimately puts more U.S. citizens and soldiers at greater risk, including Palin's own son, now fighting in Iraq along with the sons of John McCain and Joe Biden.
And Palin's political abuse of the civilian casualty issue is disrespectful to our own military leaders, who have asked for more ground troops in Afghanistan so that we don't have to use so much airpower, a situation that's more dangerous for our soldiers as well as for innocent Afghans. I thought a McCain-Palin (or is it Palin-McCain these days?) administration was going to be all about respect for our military leaders and listening to what they have to say. Very sad.
The problem of civilian casualties is -- at least back here in the "reality-based world" -- just too sober and serious to get those war whoops and whistles at your Sunbelt cheerleading competitions, too easy to lump into an evil effort to demonize Barack Obama as "that one." Even Ronald Reagan -- despite his many flaws as president --understood the gravity of the issue. Have we really fallen this far, this fast in just one short political generation?
Obama is far more Presidential. He is head and shoulders more dignified and Presidential than even Ronald Regan. His conduct, his grasp of the issues, are his ideas. This man is a born leader and he is intelligent. A quality desperately needed at the top. He is able to communicate his ideas effectively because they are his ideas and a product of his own research and contemplation. McCain and Palin are puppets spouting talking points force fed to them by handlers who's only goal is to remain in power and continue reaping the personal benefits of that power. What in Sarah Palin's personality lets her imply Barack is a terrorist? That's not leadership, that's not Presidential, that's just a character flaw. A lack of integrity, a lack of honesty, disingenuous and not deserving of our trust. These people (McCain, Palin and their handlers) just want to win and will say anything to win. John McCain has been flip flopping like a fish on a dock. In years past the republican party loyalist would be calling him out for that if he was a democrat. It's pathetic and I actually feel sorry for McCain who so blatantly has sold out. That picture of him hugging Bush makes me want to puke after the working over Bush and Rove did to him in South Carolina. But John will be all right. He's got tons of money and he'll go back to his seven homes like nothing happened and continue his "Keating Five" way of doing business hopefully out of the limelight. I hope the true Conservatives kick these neo-con fascist and freedom hating zealots out of their party and balance the damn budget already. It's laughable that the democrats are fiscally more responsible than the republicans. But then again Change is the only constant in the Universe.— JourneyHome- Obama is far more Presidential. He is head and shoulders more dignified and Presidential than even Ronald Regan. His conduct, his grasp of the issues, are his ideas. This man is a born leader and he is intelligent. A quality desperately needed at the top. He is able to communicate his ideas effectively because they are his ideas and a product of his own research and contemplation. McCain and Palin are puppets spouting talking points force fed to them by handlers who's only goal is to remain in power and continue reaping the personal benefits of that power.
Here's a little reality for you. If you are in a war, innocent civilians will be killed, especially against an enemy who blends in with the general population. The United States does all it can to keep these to a minimum, and is successful. To say otherwise is a lie, and to have our hands tied out of fear of killing civilians seals our defeat. The responsibility for the vast majority of dead civilians falls on the terrorists who hide behind them. Also, Obama's comment states that we are currently only air-raiding villages and killing civilians. His stated reason for this is not enough troops, but the reason doesn't matter, his words are pretty clear.— jmc
"but the reason doesn't matter". Brilliant.— Captain Awesome- These people are human beings, not just collateral damage. How many civilians have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan? These figures are seldom published. Nor is the fact that the Pope--for all you flag waiving Catholics--has told Bush repeatedly that Iraq is NOT a just war, thereby making participation in it a mortal sin.— voiceofreason
Comment removed.- Comment removed.
- I see Xi Jah picked up today's talking points..— Politburo
- Great post Will - I really love the Reagan quote. In my opinion, the issue of civilian casualties is not discussed nearly enough. Every innocent person that our military kills - even by accident - is a sin that every American citizen carries on their shoulders.— ElBlot
- OBAMA: "Its above my paygrade".... Mother Teresa: "The greatest destroyer of peace is abortion because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me? There is nothing between.".... "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."... CATHOLICS: It is within your paygrade. Vote.— KevinS
- What the wingnuts don't get is that we want the civilians on our side. We aren't at war against Iraq and we aren't at war against Afghanistan. Elblot, you're getting carried away calling every civilian death a sin on our shoulders. Now THAT'S the kind of thing Palin would be right to trash. Even the statement, that you could sin by accident, makes no sense.— SteveMG
"Here's a little reality for you. If you are in a war, innocent civilians will be killed, especially against an enemy who blends in with the general population." . . . . . jmc, maybe you need to tell that to Palin? It's funny how would-be pro-lifers ignore such reality.- Hello Xi Jah. It is obvious who the real idiot is - that would be you - since you cannot respond in a human, dignified way to your fellow Americans when you disagree with their opinions. Since you act like a child, why don't you go sit in the corner with your thumb in your mouth and think of a more reasonable way to respond like with real facts and logic as opposed to "you're an idiot". Any monkey in the Zoo can come up with that response.— Danny55
- Comment removed.
- The concept of civilians dying "by accident" is misleading anyway. Military target evaluators have ratios that they use to determine the number of civilians they consider expendable contingent on the value of the target. Barring information that a terrorist is in the area a bomb wouldn't be dropped, but the civilian deaths are not accidental, and sometimes the information is wrong and the only resultant deaths are those of civilians. The "collateral damage" is not simply the deaths of the civilians, but also very counterproductive impact on the larger war. This is the very reason that more emphasis should be made on other measures that are more productive and have less collateral damage. The situation in Iraq only became less horrendous once the maniacal civilians that were originally crafting the military strategy in Iraq (i.e., Rumsfeld and his cronies), civilians who lacked the necessary insight into how to wage the war successfully, civilians empowered by George Bush and indirectly the Republicans who voted for Bush, were removed. I once thought that McCain had some greater awareness of the damage caused by ill-conceived military strategies that didn't sufficiently weigh the costs of collateral damage. Unfortunately, his pandering to his base - as represented by his reversal on torture and his ridiculing the notion of the potential benefits of direct diplomacy - suggest that he has raised political expediency above successful strategy.— Talking point sleuth
Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.
E-mail Will by clicking here.
PLEASE COMMENT WITH PASSION...
...but not with racial slurs, potentially libelous allegations, obscenities or other juvenile noise. Such comments will, at our discretion, be deleted in their entirety, and repeat offenders will be blocked from commenting. ALSO: Any commenter advocating killing any government official will be immediately banned.
Thanks.
- Atrios
- Kiko's House
- Suburban Guerilla
- Booman Tribune
- All-Spin Zone
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Afro-Netizen
- Rowhouse Logic
- MyDD
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- iFlipFlop
- CorrenteWire
- upyernoz
- Tattered Coat
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- Slacktivist
- Citizen Mom
- The Next Mayor
- Philly Future
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Young Philly Politics
- Phillyblog
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Phawker
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Keystone Blog
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- BlankBaby
- Above Average Jane
- Phillyist
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- The Clog
- Josh Marshall
- Daily Kos
- Juan Cole
- Oliver Willis
- Andy Borowitz
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- BuzzFlash
- Raw Story
- Cursor
- Crooks and Liars
- Swing State Project
- Kevin Drum
- Talk Left
- AmericaBlog
- Hullabaloo
- Mad Kane
- Think Progress
- Jesus' General
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Majikthise
- Echidne of the Snakes
- David Sirota
- Glenn Greenwald
- TBogg
- Fire Dog Lake
- Taylor Marsh
- Matthew Yglesias
- Jon Swift
- Drudge Report
- Beer Leaguer
- The 700 Level
- Dick Polman
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Shallow Center
- Philling Station
- Phillies Nation
- A Citizen's Blog
- The Good Phight
- Romenesko
- Editor and Publisher
- Pressthink
- Buzzmachine
- The Inksniffer
- Media Bloodhound
- Eat the Press
- Mickey Kaus
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Blinq
- The Corner
- Instapundit
- Andrew Sullivan
- Free Republic
- James Taranto
- Blonde Sagacity
- ScrappleFace
- Blogorrhea
- February
- January
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- News | Sports | Business | What's Happening | Restaurants & Food | Entertainment | Living | Marketplace | Jobs
