Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Wed Sep 11, 2013, 04:26 PM Sep 2013

The children.

From the way many politicians have been talking about it, you could be forgiven for believing that children were the only victims of the use of gas in the Ghouta neighborhood of Damascus on August 21st.

Nothing tugs at our heartstrings so much as innocent children suffering and dying, particularly when they are victims of a heinous attack.

My problem with the emphasis on the children who died in Ghouta is that it diminishes the deaths of all the children and others who died terrible deaths in the Syrian Civil War, both prior to and after August 21.

Ezra Klein put it well

<snip>

Most Americans aren’t paying close attention to the civil war in Syria. They don’t know that more than 100,000 Syrians have died, and that chemical weapons account for less than 1 percent of those casualties. It’s borderline perverse to use descriptions of pain, suffering and death to justify an intervention that would leave the cause of more than 99 percent of these deaths untouched. As Time’s Michael Crowley tweeted, “The images of children crippled by conventional bombs were sickening, too.”

To put it simply, if it is “the images of children writhing in pain and going still on a cold hospital floor” that motivate our intervention in Syria, why should we care whether the children were attacked with gas or steel?

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/10/obama-made-a-very-good-argument-on-syria-and-a-very-bad-one/

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
1. The whole "think about the children" meme by the PTB,
Wed Sep 11, 2013, 04:43 PM
Sep 2013

while they wring their blood stained hands, just smacks so much of hypocrisy and opportunistic cynicism. Do they really believe we are that stupid?

Celefin

(532 posts)
2. Cold convenience
Wed Sep 11, 2013, 05:11 PM
Sep 2013

Wait for your target to use an awful weapon that you don't use and get all morally worked up about it. Ignore that half the world thinks that your own weapons are absolutely hideous and bans them. Build a coalition willing to be just as outraged while ignoring that inconvenient truth because they want to look tough at home and keep hoping for some crumbs thrown their way. Go to war.

...get warblocked by public opinion and unforeseen diplomatic twists. Damn. Rejoice and say it was your plan all along.

---

'The Children killed with gas' is just another convenient tool; and an easily forgotten one at that.
Last week there was clamoring for Assad and his regime to be punished with cruise missile strikes. Now suddenly the great diplomatic victory that prevents exactly that if followed through is the only thing that matters - don't mention the kids. The final victory of convenience... and if it all fails we still have the youtube gas-dead kids to fall back on. Those that somehow are more important than the thousands of kids dying a slow and agonizing death caused by 'acceptable' weapons. Those that don't even have a hospital floor to die on because the hospital has been reduced to rubble. But that's just collateral damage.

Disclaimer: No, I don't approve of chemical weapons. No, I don't love Assad or Putin. No, I'm not disappointed there hasn't been an attack yet. Yes, I hope we'll stay out of this mess except for providing assistance and protection to the masses of refugees and the countries that have to deal with that crisis.

lumpy

(13,704 posts)
5. By using the death of children for political reasons by either side of an issue is disturbing.
Wed Sep 11, 2013, 05:31 PM
Sep 2013

It appears that your post was presented for political purposes also.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
7. that doesn't make sense. what political reason do you think
Wed Sep 11, 2013, 05:52 PM
Sep 2013

was my motivation?

but aside from that, it's worthy of note for the reasons that Klein points out.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
9. "... why should we care whether the children were attacked with gas or steel?" Indeed. Or by ....
Thu Sep 12, 2013, 07:56 AM
Sep 2013

... napalm, agent orange, white phosphor, depleted uranium or a sharp stick?

Faked moral outrage from leaders who starve their own children and allow their own sick to die in order to protect corporate insurance investors in London, Hong Kong and Tokyo.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The children.