Quote:
Originally posted by the
True, but what's the point? I think just about everyone knows that soldiers can die, and that most accept those deaths, if they are dying for a just cause/one that serves the US interests.
No one is going to argue deaths of soldiers as a basis for withdrawal for a cause they support.
I don't agree, I think it's fair game for detractors to argue. Not only are there the 3K, but remember, there is absolutely no end in sight. I don't think most war detractors argue the past (the 3K already dead), but really focus more on the future deaths. Given that this war has no foreseeable end, that number is arguably infinite, unless some solution is determined.
Detractors have no problem with that issue. The war is wrong.
I don't see how you can say that the number of US soldiers that have died, and that continue to be at risk for death, is not a relevant ground for argument by a person who thinks the war is wrong.
|
Because it cannot be any other way in war. There will ALWAYS be loss of life and risk. The portrayal of 3K soldiers over five years as unpalatable is ludicrous. It's an amazingly low statistic by any historical measure.
It is so low that it should not be used in this manner as doing so is a blanket argument against all war (even the near perfect in regards to casualties). It's not genuine.