4000

The Iraq War has just claimed the life of a 4,000th soldier. This has been all over the news, just as nearly every soldier's death has been marked by overwhelming press coverage. I recently got an email from the College Democrats informing me that there will be a vigil tomorrow night to speak out against the war and honor those 4,000 dead soldiers.

Perhaps I am being callous and unfeeling, and while I do feel for those families who have lost someone due to this war, to be honest I don't particularly care. Soldiers go into the military knowing full well they could be laying down their life for the protection of the United States. Their families know this too. And while we should honor them for doing this so selflessly, I don't think it should be called a tragedy, but perhaps a mistake.

The real tragedy here is that there is one figure that is NEVER reported, and that is far more shocking: the Iraqi civilian body count. It is estimated to be between 82,394 and 89,914. Look at this news from the IBC, just yesterday:

Sunday 23 March: 74 dead

Baghdad: rocket/mortar attacks kill 19 (4 children among them); gunmen shoot 7 dead, Zafaraniya; suicide car bomber kills 5, Shula; roadside bomb kills 1, Mansour; 6 bodies.

Diyala
Abu Saida: gunmen kill policeman and his driver.
Baquba: gunmen kill policeman; mortars kill 2; 2 children (8 and 10 years old) are blown up by bomb in playground.
Nahar Sabah: 15 (most from the same family) die in US air strike.
Muqdadiya: 2 bodies.

Kirkuk
Kirkuk: roadside bomb kills policeman.

Wassit
Kut: 3 killed by mortars; 2 bodies.

Ninewa
Mosul: car bombs kill 2; 4 bodies.

These aren't soldiers, these are children, civilians, workers just trying to go to their jobs. The IBC records the numbers of actual violent deaths, non-combatant only. And I am expected to feel bad for the 4,000th soldier who died doing his job, a job he or she accepted willingly? We don't have a draft in this country, our military is completely voluntary.

Am I sad to hear that 4,000 soldiers have died since 2003? Yes. Especially because I think this war has needed to be over for a while. But my reasons for wanting it to end are not just those, to put it bluntly, selfish reasons that have been bandied around for a couple of years now: the exorbitant cost, the cost of US lives, the lack of justification (now that the WMD thing has been proven false), etc. We invaded a country that was ruled by an historically vicious dictator, but their government was not much worse than any other in their region, and in many ways better than others (Sudan, North Korea anyone?). At least before the country had some semblance of stability. Now it is being torn apart by violent factions that our army doesn't seem to have any control over. Regardless of what we do, whether we leave in a year or remain for 50, the power structure of the Middle East is changed, and I don't think it will be in our favor. The only thing this war has increased are graves.

Bush should not be "express[ing] sorrow" over the US deaths, but for the over 82,000 Iraqis that have been slain and murdered as a result of the chaos we have created in their country, for the 74 killed yesterday, for the however many die tomorrow. As a reference point, the Iraqi count is more than 20 times the US loss in the last 5 years. More than 20 times. It's time our leaders get some perspective....