 |
| One Two .. Many | |
The US killed innocent
people in Afghanistan
after September-11.
Unofficial estimates were of 5000 dead out of a population of 27
million. That's about one in 5400. This was the price of regime change, and it
sent the left into spasms
of protest. Lets translate that into Australian numbers. Suppose a band of psychotic Muslim fanatics were to take control of Australia by force, and they
carried out summary executions, forbade women to work, go to school, travel
outside without men etc etc etc. Imagine if the US were prepared to reinstate
democracy, but one in
5400 innocent Australians (about 3500) would be killed in the process. Would
you support the US? 3500 people is less than two year's worth of Australian road fatalities! Of
course it would be worthwhile. The only people who would not take those odds
would be sympathizers, and would be liable to be shot after the event. Of course the 'democratic' government propped up in Afghanistan is far from
perfect, and there is evidence that the country is slipping back into
fundamentalism, but the underlying analysis doesn't change. Not even when we apply the analysis to George Dubya's 'axes of evil'. How many people have to be killed in the coming Gulf War for it to not
to be justified? The left will reject this question outright, which in itself is good reason
to consider it. If the war were to bring human rights, removal of
sanctions, and democracy to the 22 million people in Iraq, but were to cost the life
of one innocent Iraqi, would it be worth it? If your answer is 'no', then think again. Innocent people are dying in Iraq now:
- from direct involvement of the Hussein regime (torture, killings etc);
- from the effects of sanctions on the country (lack of suitable medicines etc); and
- from the the usual effects of poverty (lack on nutrition,
proper sanitation and so on).
Some may think that regime change will actually make Iraq worse off,
and that Saddam will be replaced with something worse. That is hard to
imagine, but can these supporters of Saddam Hussein please step forward
and say why? Modern Western military personnel are not given orders. They are given
objectives, and populations of democracies have some say in the nature of those
objectives. Let's suggest one:
"Take out Hussein if the number of innocent civilians is less than X,
otherwise don't."
The challenge to the anti-war lobby is to set the US military an objective. How
many innocent deaths would
make the war unjust? A negative answer means you are a redneck who thinks the purpose of
the war is to kill as many innocent Iraqis as possible. And an answer of zero means you either support the Saddam regime,
or you believe in the validity of every government except your own. A positive answer means that you have a metric for judging the success of
the war after the event. Sounds good - any volunteers?
| 
