Tuesday, December 6, 2016   

  Home     About     Guest Editorials     Advertise     Blog     Site Map     Links     Contact      Subscribe RSS      Subscribe Email  
Home » Loonwatch.com

On the Cheapness of Muslim Blood: 2 U.S. Soldiers Worth More than 9 Afghan Children

5 March 2011 Loonwatch.com 14 Comments Email This Post Email This Post

On the Cheapness of Muslim Blood: 2 U.S. Soldiers Worth More than 9 Afghan Children

Yesterday was a day stained in blood.  Two U.S. soldiers were killed in Germany by a lone gunmen.  Meanwhile, nine children were killed in Afghanistan by U.S. armed forces.  Both incidents happened on the same day.  But if you’re an American watching your country’s mainstream media, you’ve probably only heard about one of these attacks.  Is there any question as to which one of these two incidents you’ve heard about?  That you’ve watched endless coverage of the two U.S. soldiers killed in Germany–and that you’ve hardly or never heard about what happened yesterday in Afghanistan–is almost certain.

Once again, American blood is boiling over the killing of two of their military personnel by someone who is suspected to be an Islamic extremist.  The anger is not just expressed on lunatic anti-Muslim websites like Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch or Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs, but palpable in the general masses of U.S. citizenry.  How could these Muslim savages kill two of our brave U.S. servicemen? Thoughts of retaliation–perhaps even using a Samson Option (nuking Mecca, Medina, and/or other Muslim-majority cities)–are certainly considered, if but fleetingly.

Meanwhile, hardly any Americans are aware that on this very same day the U.S. military slaughtered nine children in a country we occupy.  Over the course of the next few days, we will get to know the intimate lives of the two fallen U.S. soldiers.  They will become very personal to us, living and breathing people–nay, young boys–proudly serving their country.  Do you think that your government-subservient propaganda machine you call mainstream media will ever spend any time personalizing the nine dead Afghan children, telling us about their childhoods and getting to know their bereaved mothers?

Why is it that nine Afghan children–killed by our country’s military–will be a side story whereas two U.S. soldiers–part of that very same occupying force that killed those nine children–will be covered to no end?  Can you imagine–just for a second–if one of those Muslim barbarians killed nine American children on U.S. soil?  And I don’t mean nine Muslim-American children…I mean, real Americans–you know, the good white Judeo-Christian ones.  The media would lose its mind, stoking the fans of war.  Americans might then expand their knowledge of geography as they get ready to bomb yet another country they’ve never heard of before.

It is difficult not to come to the same conclusion that has been reached in the Muslim world: Americans consider Muslim blood cheap.  Had it been two Muslim soldiers from some Muslim country that had been killed in their beds, the title of the articles in U.S. news reports would have read “two Islamic militants (or insurgents) killed” and that would be the end of that.  American soldiers are always “soldiers” and “servicemen”–never “militants” or “occupiers”.

Yesterday, we saw how two military men became more precious than nine young children.  The idea that U.S. (or Israeli) soldiers are worth more than the civilians in the countries they occupy is an old one: remember that myth that still persists that nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved “a million U.S. lives”?  Even though that claim is completely spurious, even if we accept it for argument’s sake, didn’t anyone wonder if the lives of U.S. soldiers were really worth more than that of Japanese children?

The killing in Afghanistan will go unnoticed for a reason that is even more disturbing: we’ve been killing their civilians for a long, long time.  So far, the U.S. military has killed hundreds of thousands of Muslim civilians.  So another nine children dead is just a drop in the bucket–a bucket full of Muslim blood.  Meanwhile, zero U.S. civilians have been killed by jihadists since 9/11 [this article was published in May of 2010, so if this statistic has changed, please let me know; but as far as I know, this is still accurate].  Surely then, two U.S. soldiers being killed is noteworthy.  In other words, so much Muslim blood has been shed that nobody notices when more is spilled.

But of course the American jingoists will say “it’s not the same” and they will explain to us why the killing of two U.S. soldiers “counts” and how the killing of nine Afghan children doesn’t.  Yet, if we wanted to compare the two incidents, then surely the latter is more indefensible.  For one, the Afghan dead were children.  Second, nine is–as far as I know–considered to be a higher number than two.  Third, the U.S. soldiers were killed by a lone gunmen, or at worst by a stateless organization that terrorizes its own populations.  Meanwhile, the nine children were killed by the U.S. military backed by the U.S. government in a war that was supported at its inception by its citizenry.  Fourth, the U.S. is an occupier in a country.  Although the U.S. citizenry may have become accustomed to being in the role of occupiers, history will have absolute disdain for foreign invaders.  Fifth, the lone gunmen may have been deranged mentally and thought he was justified because those U.S. soldiers were en route to join an occupation force–whereas the U.S. is killing Muslim children due to a national hysteria.

Granted, the U.S. military has stated that the strike against Afghan children was “accidental,” so in this particular way the killing of U.S. servicemen may have been worse.  But one wonders how much indiscriminate killing of civilians has to go on before it “counts”?

To understand how little the occupier feels guilty for the deaths caused by its occupation, we can look at the absolutely atrocious comments made by the Commander of the U.S. forces in Afghanistan, General David Patraeus, who defended the slaughter of the nine Afghan children by blaming the deaths on their parents.  In what can only be described as the most disgusting comment ever, Gen. Patraeus had the audacity to suggest “that Afghans caught up in a coalition attack in northeastern Afghanistan might have burned their own children to exaggerate claims of civilian casualties.”  Did you get that?  He’s claiming that Afghan parents slaughtered and immolated their own children in order to make the U.S. look bad.  How can “an apology” for killing children be taken seriously when it is delivered to parents whom you are accusing of killing their own children?  Absolutely preposterous!

Can you imagine if a Muslim Congressman–the one or two we have–dared say such a thing about Israeli children killed in a Hamas rocket attack, i.e. that the Israeli parents burned alive their own children in order to make Hamas look bad?  What do you think would have happened?  Do you remember how the mainstream media–Fox News especially–dealt with Imam Rauf’s post 9/11 statement where he opined that the U.S. foreign policy might possibly have contributed as a cause to the attack (gasp!, you don’t say!)?  The MSM kept replaying clips of those now infamous words, invalidating all the good Rauf has ever done in his life.

Yet, Gen. Patraeus’ words–which morbidly blamed the parents for the deaths of their own children–will hardly or just passingly be mentioned by U.S. news outlets.  Patraeus will simply issue an insincere apology and the matter will soon be forgotten.  He won’t be fired, nor will he be shamed in the public eye.  After enough Afghans have died and enough U.S. wealth spent (and it will be the latter which will cause a withdrawal, since Americans could care less about the former), Patraeus will come back home and be heaped with the great honors of a war hero.

To be absolutely clear: the murder of two U.S. soldiers in Germany is deplorable.  Such an act is illegal under international law, immoral based on human ethics, and is even forbidden under Islamic law.  Neither do I malign those soldiers who were killed–I understand that they were just doing their job, and my “anger” is only aimed at the government who risked their lives for no good reason.  Whatever deity you believe in–whether it is Jesus, Allah, or Yahweh–or even if you don’t believe in any–we can all pray or take a moment of silence for all those who fell yesterday, including the two U.S. soldiers and the nine Afghan children.  Our compassion as human beings compels us to do that.

Those responsible for the crime of killing the two U.S. soldiers in Germany should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  But will any law touch those responsible for the murder of nine Afghan children in the country we occupy?  Will we at least look inside our own selves before we point all the fingers at the Muslim world?  Will we ever contemplate that our religious right wing–and that in Israel–was a big factor in launching these ill-conceived wars?  One thing is certain: we won’t put Judaism or Christianity on trial as we put Islam on trial.  The double standards in the media against Muslims and Islam are absolutely unacceptable.  Free yourself from this brainwashing and try watching some real news–start by watching Al-Jazeera English–imperfect though it is, it is far better than the government-subservient establishment media in the U.S.

Share/Bookmark




14 Comments »

  1. I think the author is involving too many feelings in his/her article, it sounds full of hate! “It is difficult not to come to the same conclusion that has been reached in the Muslim world: Americans consider Muslim blood cheap” Really??? is it difficult for you??? I like to think that there’s a huge number of people who are predicating love and not hate. I don’t like the author generalizing Americans
    I’m not Muslim, and I’m against Islamophobia too but These kinds of comments makes me sick, you’re fighting back hate with more hate.
    Peace

  2. Who cares. That country is so poor they can’t afford to feed the kids anyway. Besides… they can always make more, and I’m sure they will.

  3. Grandpa used to say, “I refuse to be drawn into a battle of wits with an unarmed person.” So I’m going to restrain myself from point-on-point response to your inflaming article.

    What “jumps out” at me is that the two U.S. Servicemen were NOT in a battle-zone when they were attacked…while the 9 Afghan children were.

    As far as the U.S. media sweeping incidents of this nature under the rug; I would request you to Google “Kent State Students” or “My Lai”. The U.S. military has taken many, many hits in the media when they overstep their boundaries….the latest that comes to mind is the incidents at the Iraqi prison.

    You state, “Had it been two Muslim soldiers from some Muslim country that had been killed in their beds, the title of the articles in U.S. news reports would have read “two Islamic militants (or insurgents) killed” and that would be the end of that.” How can you state as FACT what the headlines would have read? That’s just your Opinion! Unless you’re one of the people who would have written the headlines then you can on speculate what they would have said.

    And unless YOU yourself have been in the situation where a “child” is in front of you holding a gun and pointing it at you (much less actually firing it) then you really no background to call upon to judge those of us that have been there. What is the “Magic Age” when a child ceases to be an Agressor EVEN IF they are pointing a weapon at you and pulling the trigger? Maybe you could write about that in your next article.

    Of course, as Mr. Miller used to say, that’s just my opinion and I could be wrong.

  4. There is a lot of context which is missing from this essay. Also, the tone makes it sound as if the writer feels that the “blood of Americans” is somehow “cheap.”

    First, according to the LA Times, General Petraeus “immediately” apologized for the deaths of the Afghan children. The LA Times is usually considered “main stream media.” The Times went on to report more about the children and their community. Included was an account of how the whole affair was triggered by a Taliban attack on a remote US base. As the Taliban were fleeing and regrouping, a US gunship responded and mistakenly targeted the children gather firewood in the area.

    In all likelihood, and given previous tactics seen in use by the Taliban, confusion with the children was probably the goal of the attack’s timing. Use the kids as cover for their escape. Ignoring this context makes this essay sound like deliberate “Pro-Taliban Propaganda.”

  5. killing, and killing of innocent people in particular is a sin one will never ever get away from. killing a child is many times worse. facing a child with a gun pointed at him puts a man in a situation with only one correct choice, and it is deadly for him. killing a child (who in the eyes of law does not have the judgment to be responsible for his or her actions) to save your life makes you a criminal and a sinner no matter what are the circumstances. If we don’t apply the same rules to our soldiers as we apply to our policemen then we have no moral compass whatsoever. But all this is a pointless talk – the nine children mentioned in the article were not pointing guns at anyone. most civilian killing done by our brave troops (and most other military forces nowadays) is done remotely – watch “collateral murder” video on YouTube – a great patriotic BS cutter. murder is a murder is a murder, and the only result of it is more murder, as our poor guys in Germany experienced. collective complicity in murdering people will lead to collective punishment. sorry, this is how things work.

  6. The answer to that is simple. Nobody in America cares how many Muslims are killed. And the children are just little terrorists-in-training who will grow up to kill more Americans. Never heard of that Samson option but it sounds good to me.

  7. The servicemen who killed the children would not have done so if they had known they were children. Perhaps the insurgents should not shell or shoot at soldiers from positions which will get children killed. It is not the Americans who hold the lives of those children cheap it is the ones who decided to start a military engagement with American Soldiers while adjacent to 9 children. I, however, believe that the insurgents knew what would happen, they planned the attack, and they got the result they wanted. Nine dead kids make a lot of people angry or just plain sick. Just what they wanted at a price they could afford since the kids paid it and they lived to shoot someone else another day.

  8. This websites biase is there for all to see, I am proud to have the label Islamophobic because a phobia is a rational fear and having a fear about Muslims and Islam is a rational thought process, who is it who perpetrates 99.9% of all the terrorist activities around the world? Yes Muslims, therefore my rational for having such a phobia is proved, your love for everything Islamic just shows your ignorance, wake up America before it’s too late…..

    http://dearengland.wordpress.com/2011/03/07/the-enemy-within/

  9. O Yes please watch Al-jazeera English for a totally unbiased viewpoint, a company that has some very dubious financial backing?

    http://dearengland.wordpress.com/2011/03/07/the-enemy-within/

  10. March 7, 2011. At least 12 civilians, including five children, have been killed by a roadside bomb in eastern Afghanistan. They were driving through Paktika province when their vehicle hit the bomb. Two women as well as five children were among the dead. Roadside bombs are often used by insurgents to kill members of U.S. led forces but often kill local people instead. President Hamid Karzai has condemned the bombing as “against all principles of Islam”.

  11. I’ll need to contradict my closing with this addendum that I screwed up and forgot to edit a portion where I was looking up search results and pasting numbers. The correct amount is just over 2.

  12. I seem to have missed a post. For completion sake, and OCD, and to clarify by what is intended by 2: 2.1 times as many search results. These search result numbers are approximated, but should remain in a ballpark range when searching with the same phrase multiple times. With that out of the way, the post looks like:

    *”The servicemen who killed the children would not have done so if they had known they were children. Perhaps the insurgents should not shell or shoot at soldiers from positions which will get children killed. It is not the Americans who hold the lives of those children cheap it is the ones who decided to start a military engagement with American Soldiers while adjacent to 9 children. I, however, believe that the insurgents knew what would happen, they planned the attack, and they got the result they wanted. Nine dead kids make a lot of people angry or just plain sick. Just what they wanted at a price they could afford since the kids paid it and they lived to shoot someone else another day.*

    The beginning statement seems fine, and is what most people already believe, or want to believe. Although the rest of it tries to shift all blame onto the insurgents; this isn’t to say that the enemy combatants are without blame, obviously they are, whether or not the death of the nine children was premeditated or unintentional. Although this does not excuse civilian casualties caused by US forces.

  13. Normally Reticent, I was not there and like anyone that offers an opinion on an incident in which none of us have any first hand information it is impossible to make any firm conclusions. As to what happened, other than the base fact of 9 children being killed with American troops being the killers, it is hard to say.
    I will say this though, Insurgents cannot win a ground war but they can win a propaganda war. They need to sap America’s will to fight, move public opinion away from support of US troops both in the United States and in Afghanistan. If they simply allow US troops to rebuild townships, hand out food, dig wells, and so on the insurgents lose. In this type of war incidents such as this are a necessity to erode both public and local support. In human terms this was a tragic affair, in military terms this was a U.S. Defeat and a victory for the insurgency. If you or others do not think that top people on both sides of this conflict are not thinking in these terms then we are not living in the same world.

  14. US soldiers are war criminals, it’s as simple as that. All the idiots making excuses for these murderous scumbags are no better.
    If this was done anywhere in America, I doubt you’d be so cavalier about it.

Have your say!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>