In December, 1989, once Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega had outlived his usefulness as a U.S. pawn in the U.S./Central American wars and drug dealing, President George H.W. Bush sent the U.S. military into Panama City to overthrow him in "Operation Just Cause". More than 1,000 Panamanian civilians were killed and many thousands more made homeless as U.S. forces invaded and shelled civilian areas. Why was this not "senseless"?
Two years later, after Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had outlived his usefulness as a U.S. "asset" in the Middle East, and he foolishly misinterpreted U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie's ambiguous reply as a U.S. approval of his intended invasion of Kuwait, his nation was attacked by U.S. and allied forces in the Gulf War. Once he was defeated and Iraqi forces withdrew from Kuwait, savage, illegal sanctions were imposed on the innocent people of Iraq by Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, resulting in the deaths of more than one million Iraqis, including more than 500,000 children. Why was this not "senseless"?
In 2003, George W. Bush attacked Iraq in a war and occupation which has killed at least one million more people, including hundreds of thousands of children, has caused deformities and birth defects due to U.S. use of depleted uranium in cities such as Fallujah, and has made more than four million Iraqis refugees. This was "justified" by what we now know were lies about Saddam Hussein's supposed links to the 9/11/01 terrorism and his weapons of mass destruction. Why were these U.S.-caused deaths and refugees not "senseless"?
Currently, in spite of the conclusions of the intelligence services of both the U.S. and Israel that Iran is not pursuing development of nuclear weapons, the U.S. and its allies have imposed harsh sanctions, tantamount to a declaration of war, on Iran, which will not discomfort Iran's rulers in the slightest, but will punish its innocent ordinary people, who are guilty of no crime. Why are these punishing sanctions not "senseless"?
The parameters of "acceptable" discourse and the vocabulary in which that discourse must be encoded all mandate that the above official actions by the U.S. must never be equated with such horrendous, senseless violence as that which was committed by the gunman in Aurora, Colorado. Why not?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
