It’s bad enough when media refer to civilian deaths in U.S. wars as “collateral damage,” but it was jarring to see how the phrase was used in a Washington Post headline today:
Obviously, they’re talking about the sex-and-emails scandal. How could dead Afghan civilians ever threaten the career of a high-ranking U.S. official?
It can’t threaten a career
But it unquestionably can advance it
We have come so far from the equality of human beings that a tawdry affair of a “big shot” (literally) is newsworthy and criticized while he was promoted despite his murder of civilians–meanwhile the brave whistleblower, Bradley Manning, still sits in prison under threat of a death sentence, awaiting a trial under a Constitution that calls for speedy trials. Preference for Obama as president only shows a small awakening of the public.
Stupid choice of words for a stupid action.
But in fact, that is the proper use of the term, isn’t it? Using it for dead civilians is the perversion of the language that’s horrifying – and no doubt first used with a wink and a nod by the military trying desperately not to be horrified by what they were doing.
Just shows how calloused and biased the CMSM is reducing even further the euphemistic meaning of “collateral damage” from people not directly targeted dying to less lethal outcomes for others on the periphery of a scandal. That is terrible in itself.
There are going to be schoolchildren who learn of our society in the futureand will marvel at what moral monsters we were, all the while trumpeting our supposedly superior ethics and values.
In the future children wont have time to learn about what moral monsters we were.They will be to busy working their fingers ti the bone to pay the debt we have saddled them with.
Too bad the two wars you supported [and Petraeus and Allen helped conduct] “saddled” our children with at least $4 trillion in future debt that they “will be to busy working their fingers ti the bone to pay .”
Takes a certain kid of “moral monster” to do that.
Wars I supported???Well i sure as hell supported the war in Afghanistan.Twin towers kind of set my mind on ease on that one.Iraq not so much.And I was no Bush supporter.Felt he was unqualified.Obama of course is a joke.Never really held a job that one.He was not qualified to be night manager of a 7/11.But i digress.Bush did what he and most of the world body felt what was right at the time.History(not liberal yapping dogs)will judge if it was the right move.For me……Now Im glad Iraq has a chance at freedom.I mourn the loss of lives.And the cost to each taxpayer.America bled to give Iraq that chance.I respect that.And not to be crass…but wall street J recently reported that oil savings and investments in Iraq are quickly paying down the wars cost.Solvency is expected in 4 years.The other- larger half of war was thrust on us in the 911 attack.Of course all that is nothing compared to the increase in government disretionary spending and fiscal malfeasance.Remember the Pentagons budget climbed by percentage points to cunduct these wars.To field our armies in peacetime is not free.The cost of the war is not a zero sum gain.Example.To field one company in Georgia would cost 80- 120K including continued training for a set period of time.That cost in Battle of the same company 2x to three times that for the same time period.A liberal writer always write as if peacetime is free, and so the cost of war is all on the debit side.Most libs believe Rs start wars to revive the economy.That it is a huge money MAKER. Sadly it is partly true that tons of money is made here due to these wars
“Remember the Pentagons budget climbed by percentage points to cunduct these wars.”
According to the conservative American Enterprise Institute, “The defense budget has more than doubled in the last decade, and those increases were largely tied to fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Not surprisingly, this has meant a near tripling in the ‘operations and maintenance’ segment of the defense budget as equipment and ammunition is used at a far-higher rate than in peacetime.”
————
“Of course all that is nothing compared to the increase in government disretionary spending and fiscal malfeasance.”
Defense spending IS discretionary spending…and currently 58 cents of each discretionary dollar spent goes to defense.
“fiscal malfeasance.” is a nice polite way to describe the Bush economic disaster we’re still recovering from. Well put.