Why moral outrage over the Marine Shooting won't go far now...

Hate to play the Devil's Advocate here but there have been too many beheadings and executions of westerners in Iraq now for the Marine Shooting to outrage enough Americans to matter. In fact, ask yourself how you can be outraged at the Marine shooting and not feel in the LEAST outraged at the execution of Margaret Hassan, the CARE director who was actually TRYING to help the Iraqis!! I'm sorry but it's getting harder for me to keep playing "America the bad guy" after I just watched a bloody beheading of a hostage pleading for their life! At this point I'm going to say that NOBODY has moral ascendancy here and its just a matter of who has more bullets!

Pheww! There! I feel better! Now let the flames begin! But I warn you..if flame you must..can you at least provide an explaination why you might be outraged at the Marine Shooting, but not the execution of Margaret Hassan. I'll listen, but I don't think a reasonable explaination is possible.

I think that's the critical difference. We really do hold ourselves to higher standards, and both we and the world expect us to try to live up to them. Iraq is, simply, not held to those same standards.

Now, I agree with you that this won't go too far. But I think that's because the soldier has already been removed from the field, and the military has started investigating. We do take this seriously, and our actions show it.

I don't think the Arab outrage bit will go too far, though - and in that case, it's for the reasons you stated.

Drew Garrett

at both these events. This whole war sucks major ass and we need to get the hell out of there.

I don't think reacting with outrage at one of those incidents precludes the same reaction to the other.

thing is to take peoples mind off the recount.

What matters is that the Arab world saw it and hates it. We can't afford to stir anti-American sentiment any more than we've been doing. Already the State Department and Pentagon admit in memos that it will take a generation to undo the damage Abu Ghraib has caused. As for this...

This is a question I posed to a freeper I know.
Imagine the United States had been occupied by China. Imagine that in Houston, red-blooded Americans were fighting back, and had recaptured the city. And then imagine that the Chinese started bombing at random. And imagine you saw first pictures of Chinese torturing and humiliating American young men, and then saw this video of a Chinese soldier firing into the face of a wounded, unarmed American man. How would *you* react?

He called me a supporter of terror and didn't answer the question.

You see, hardliners--both here and there--have much the same mindset.

Your analogy to Chinese soldiers assumes our ends are bad. I actually believe that we are trying to help them set up a better system than they had. We did so in Afghanistan, and we're trying to do so in Iraq.

Look, after all, at both Germany and Japan. We were occupiers there as well. And yet, in neither country were we hated for a generation afterwards.

In the end, it is worth remembering that Saddam Hussein's regime was an evil one. We have already overthrown that. We now want to leave them with a functioning system, and that does involve making sure that the next group of thugs won't simply take over.

It sure is messy, though.

Drew Garrett

can't be contained and is harmed irreparably as a result of these leaks, I would say that it's a pretty good bet that our image isn't going to be too good any time in the next 20 years.

Ok. Agreed.

"America, the Bad Guy."

1. In addition the unconscionable act of shooting an unarmed man being an issue, another issue is the way we have set young Americans up. We get their adrenaline pumping, and indoctrinate them with ideas. They aren't 45-years-old like me. They are 18, 19, 20. I can't expect them to have the same level of judgment (hope I expressed this correctly).

2. Killing an aid worker is unconscionable. But I also worry about this Holy War that has been the result of the Bush administration's actions ... recent aggression seems to have fanned the fires of worldwide hatred of Americans or anyone cooperating with them by many young Muslims.

Ours and theirs. Ours will think it is OK and theirs will be another Christmas gift to Osama.This is like the frosting on the cake after Fullajah for Osama. We have our new body of a western women and a few killing houses for be-heading. All the people who are into good and evil are now happy so we can fight on. Only people like us and the rest of the world is shocked by it all.

taken by U.S. soldiers. What part of that is so hard for you to understand?

By your "reasoning" if some criminals or enemies perform heinous acts, then there is no limits to what Americans can then do.

Disgusting.

That's the ugly truth.

The really weird thing is that, if you remind them of this sort of thing 30 years from now, they'll fly into a rage and call you a liar.

hoped to encourage sentiments such as those you've expressed.

It's amazing how many people blame all Iraqis for the actions of a mysterious, unknown few.

Iraq is in a swirling state of war and anarchy.

Anyone, from native criminal gangs to foreign agents, can set up business in Iraq.

We have no idea who is doing what over there. There are scores of different clans, gangs, militias, interests and organizations operating.

The Hassan murder, much like the UN HQ bombing, certainly is puzzling because there seems to be no benefit for any of the indigenous causes.

I wonder, had the UN stayed in Iraq, would've the US been able to lay waste to cities like Fallujah?

And if they had gone ahead and done it, would've the UN presence gotten the truth out about the civilian casualities?

Whom does it benefit to drive out non imbed journalists, international observers and humanitarian workers?

on the part of a resistance movement that does not have an air force, tanks, or any sophisticated military weapons in their arsenal to fight the people who invaded their country and killed 100,000 of their innocents.

She could have been saved by her country if they choose to make a deal. They did not, in spite of her heart rendering pleas to her native Britain. It could have been done behind the scenes withuot loss of face. She was a sacrificial lamb. They will do it again and if they had made a deal, they still will do it again, so what is the difference.

some have been released. I suspect there were deals made on the side , for instance the two Italian young women,that we or anyone will never be made aware of.

not nearly as bad as what Kerry did in Viet Nam., I don't know have druggie Limbaugh would know anything about Nam since he like all repuke leadership is a draft dodger.