I was reading an article just now and it made me think. Many people believe, or at least claim to believe, that unbiased news means simply getting "the facts" and deriving ones own conclusions. So here are the facts, according to the article: Over 2,300 US military men and women dead, over 17,000 US wounded, and "a minimum of 33,000 dead Iraqi civilians" --- what would your conclusion be? I don't know how the author came to her conclusion but she somehow manages to claim that this is evidence of our failure in Iraq and justification for our withdrawal. I look at these "facts", these statistics, and many questions are raised in my mind, the first of which is "who is killing the civilians?" I am not so blind that I would think our military incapable of killing civilians while executing military operations, but from what I have read it seems as if terrorists, suicide bombers, insurgents, are the ones killing civilians. How many "civilians" did Saddam kill prior to the liberation in 2003? Do I think that our military belongs in Iraq? Not necessarily, and I don't feel as strongly that we should be there as I did 3 years ago. Do I think we should pull out because people are dying? No. I know that many men in history have lost their lives in the fight for freedom and if our Iraqi brothers wish it, then we should give them all the strength we have to help them be free.
Let the Facts Speak for Themselves
Posted by Benjamin Crum at 3/21/2006 10:13:00 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Welcome, to the bcBlog
This is the official blog of Ben Crum & BC Online. Check out the Crum Brothers at Crumbros.com and the Crum Family at the CrumFamilyBlog.
6 comments:
Ben,
For REAL news of what is going on in the Middle East, in regards to the US Military, you should check out (http://www.armytimes.com) or (http://www.military.com/IraqNews)
they are good, not liberal-biased (but not conservative-biased either) sources of US Military news.
Army Times is the best one I have found.
Sorry about the parentheses, but I still can't figure out how to put a link in a comment so you'll just have to copy and paste.
I don't think that you should read the news and just believe what you've read. It's all going to be biased to an extent. For those of us who don't know what suffering is, as the Iraqi people do, we shouldn't be so quick to deny them freedom. I feel that there are many reasons that troops are in Iraq. The biggest reason may be for oil, but when is war and politics not about money. But, if even a sliver of the reason that we are there is to give the Iraqi people freedom from terany and opression, than I say we have an obligation to stay there until they get it. We would be a country without morals if we let their suffering go on any longer.
The only thing I would add nate is this: if the people of Iraq don't want "freedom" then we should pull out right now. there was a good cartoon I saw yesterday that has a line of Iraqi people... well, here it is. I think Islam encourages slavery, bondage. The truth is, as long as they are under Allah, they are under a tyrannical government.
Ben, with freedom there would be the chance for christianity to be legal, 'casue it ain't right now. I understand that many of them may not want "our western ways", and therefore don't want us to give them freedom, but if freedom helps out the christians in the region than maybe we should impose our western culture on them. But, the other side of the argument is that our nation is one of the most fallen. We (as a nation) are like the rich man in the story where it's easier for a "camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven". If our freedom and riches have made us stray further than recovery, than maybe our "imposing of our western culture" isn't such a grand idea, but than again I'm not sure, just rambling.
Nate, I think it is important to define what we mean by freedom (this was the subject of a recent post on Jim's blog). "Freedom", as it has been understood throughout history does not mean "I can do whatever I want as long as I don't offend someone else or judge someone else's beliefs". If this were freedom, you would be right, Christianity would be outlawed... but that's just my point. "Freedom" must be bound by laws. In our nation, fallen as it is, there are still laws that govern our freedoms. I am free to drive a car, but I must register that car, pay taxes when I purchase it, and abide by traffic laws (though, do to the structure of the Matrix, some of these laws can be bent or broken). Even the "Freedom" that we are given by God through Christ is within bounds. God did not make us free to sin, but free to be "slaves" of righteousness (see Romans 6:16). My point was that Islamic religion requires or is built around the idea of political bondage, not only for Muslims but for all people everywhere. (Surah 9:29)
*note: "do" should be "due"
Post a Comment