American Casualties

I have issues with all of the candidates running for the Presidency of the United States right now. Some more than others, of course, but it suffices to say that my intention here is not to attack John McCain. His view, which I will examine, is one I often hear echoed by news anchors on every station. I can't say that I blame him individually so much as I do the political system of which he is a major part. So, McCain is perhaps to blame, but no more than likely thousands of other public figures and millions of other Americans are for going with the flow instead of questioning the way we talk about these things. I set this post up in vague terms intentionally, though the title gives away the topic at hand, in an attempt to avoid prejudice, both in my writing and in the reader.

When we talk about the war in Iraq, we tend to talk about the death toll in terms of American casualties. The information is readily available. Currently, the official casualty count of American soldiers in Iraq is 4,050. Information on other casualties, such as those of Iraqi civilians, is available, but it's never the headline, and it's not what most people are interested in, though it is a much higher number. John McCain recently expressed his view that an increase in troop levels should ultimately decrease the number of American casualties. As much as I disagree with that statement as one of fact, I disagree more with the view that it perpetuates, that American lives are somehow the only ones that count.

Why do so many Americans only care about the deaths of our own troops? The best explanation is a form of egocentrism. It's a natural, but morally unjustifiable, way of looking at the world. Unless it's called to our attention, most people gladly hold an egocentric belief with little or no feeling of guilt. It is, however, tantamount to racism, sexism, and any other form of prejudice one might use to favor those similar to himself while pushing away those who are different.

I like to think there might be other reasons, but what else could there be? We started the war, and they're the ones who signed up to potentially get shot or blown up, so doesn't that mean that we should care more about all of the other deaths that result from the conflict? Maybe it's because they're people we're more likely to be emotionally attached to, either through friendly or familial relationships, but that reasoning doesn't get us far from egocentrism at all.

Americans have a reputation for being selfish, but I hesitate to take this issue that far. We're generally a little inconsiderate, certainly, but I have to insist that we are not willfully ignorant of other people's problems. I don't know that we're willingly ignoring other deaths, either. Most Americans read and watch what they're fed, and what they're fed is what news companies latch onto. A story always sells better if it's about America, so that's precisely what we get on the front page of every paper in the country. I guess we find it more patriotic, and that makes us feel good about ourselves for buying into it. Patriotism is another thing that's been bastardized, but that's a topic for another post.

The simple solution to this admittedly strange problem is to start with yourself. Simply start caring a little more about civilian deaths, and try to be at least somewhat informed on the issue. IBC probably keeps the best count of Iraqi deaths in this conflict. I'm not proposing a solution to the war we're in. Frankly, I don't know what the best strategy is, but at least we can talk about the issue properly, in terms of human casualties rather than American casualties. In order to solve a problem, we must first understand the problem at hand.