The British Newspaper the Times ran a story on how the war has impacted six ordinary Iraqis. I think we as Americans often forget that there are average civilians living daily lives that have been greatly affected by America’s involvement in the region. These stories do a great job of adding that perspective back into our analysis of what is happening in Iraq, and what the true consequences are of U.S. intervention.
With the conflict at 3 years and 8 months, The Iraq War is now longer than the American conflict of World War Two. The only struggles that have laster longer for the United States are the Revolutionary War (6 years, 9 months), The Civil War (4 years), and the Vietnam War (8 years, 5 months). (yahoo news, 11/26/2006)
For those of you following along, you have seen my previous post about the website Watching America. As I was reading from that site today I came across an article in the “Europe” section that was originally printed in a British newspaper called the Independent. The article is titled “Thanksgiving Day Massacre Highlights Waning U.S. Power,” which I’m sure many of you have read about by now, but perhaps have not seen put in such terms. The title alone indicates the different perspective of writing coming out of the U.K. Read the article and identify some phrases or expressions that indicate how the British perspective of the war differs from the American one.
One of the phrases that struck me was the following:
Now the Pentagon and the Baker commission are deciding whether to send an extra 20,000 or 30,000 US troops to Iraq, and, in particular, to Baghdad, in a last-ditch effort to get a grip on the violence. (Cornwell)
I don’t believe an American news source has ever characterized the debated option of a US troop increase as a “last-ditch effort.” Such phrasing adds a sense of desperation that is not articulated in the American media.
Amendment I of the United States Constitution guarantees free speech in the press. Even so, we still only get the American perspective whether we’re using Fox news, CBS, National Public Radio, the New York Times, or any other American media company for that matter. However, one of the many great things that the internet does for democracy is that it allows us to reach beyond our national boundaries without much effort at all. The website Watching America does an excellent job of compiling newspapers from around the globe and translating them into English for you and I to read. I highly recommend this website as a chance to look beyond the American perspective and see what other nations are saying in the press.
Of course, many of these papers will be biased in their own way, but if we can examine other versions of the same story, then perhaps we can determine a more global truth of each event. Only then will we as members of the global community be able to come to some consensus on how to proceed during these times of difficult international tensions.
Recently Congressman Charles Rangel who represents New York State’s 15th district (primarily Manhattan, NY) restated his views on the need for a military draft. He writes:
The question of whether we need a universal military draft will be important as long as this country is placing thousands of young men and women in harm’s way in Iraq. As long as Americans are being shipped off to war, then everyone should be vulnerable, not just those who, because of economic circumstances, are attracted by lucrative enlistment bonuses and educational incentives. (Daily News)
Rangel continues by explaining that he has always been against going to war, and believes that if Congress had a personal stake in the fight in Iraq, then perhaps Congress would have been more vigilant in its examination of whether or not America should enter Iraq in the first place. As of now, over 2,800 Americans have been killed in action, and over 21,000 have been wounded. (Daily News)
In the name of equality, do you think a draft should be reinstated so that everyone must take their turn in serving their country in a time of war?
