In an analytical piece in this morning’s Washington Post, President Bush is quoted on the threat of more attacks against U.S. forces and civilians in Iraq:
“There’s still violent people who want to stop progress. Their strategy hasn’t changed. They want to kill innocent lives.”
Killing of civilians (innocent lives) is often cited by Bush and his cronies as evidence of an enemy that is inhuman. Help me understand the distinction:
We invaded Iraq; it did not declare war on us or attack us in any way. Iraqis, probably aided by outsiders, are now fighting the invasion by killing civilians, among others.
Almost 60 years ago, we were attacked (but not invaded by ground troops) by Japan. After a long war, at a point where we were clearly winning the Pacific war, we dropped a bomb that killed thousands of civilians.
In the same piece, the reporters preview Bush’s next speech on foreign policy:
Bush will try to generate further momentum behind his Iraq policy today at the Air Force Academy commencement address, when he delivers the second of a weekly series of Iraq speeches until the transition. He will detail his view of how Iraq fits into the broader war on terrorism and why the stakes are high. He plans to argue that the war is a clash of ideologies between the civilized world and al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists, and will describe similarities and differences between this war and World War II, U.S. officials said.
Perhaps he will address how killing of civilians is a perfectly acceptable war tactic for us but not for Iraqis.