Newspaper Ignores Real War Costs
What you rarely find in the relentless editorials about the gruesome Iraq occupation by The Daily Oklahoman is any mention of its real costs. So here they are:
There have been 3,242 American soldiers killed and more than 24,000 wounded since the invasion.
Estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths range from 60,000 to 650,000. Thousands more have been wounded.
The financial costs stand at $411 billion so far.
These figures will grow immediately after this is posted.
The Oklahoman, in its most recent editorial on the occupation (“Pelosi’s victory: Anti-war vote won’t bring Iraq resolution,” March 27, 2008), criticizes a Democratic-sponsored House bill that puts a reasonable timetable on the country’s biggest foreign policy debacle in a generation, and then, ironically and with audacity, talks about the “costs” of that timetable.
Yet, as usual, the editorial doesn't mention the occupation’s death toll or how much taxpayers have spent on it.
The editorial rambles on about how Speaker Nancy Pelosi engaged in some “old fashioned skull cracking” (what clichéd, archaic rubbish) to get the bill passed, but doesn’t mention one dead soldier or one dead, innocent Iraqi citizen. Instead, it makes a standard GOP argument about the political costs for Democrats opposed to the war.
The newspaper’s continuing attempts to politicize, not humanize, the Iraq invasion and occupation are inexcusable. It hides the real costs of the war in a morass of clichés and distortions and omissions. When a news outlet intentionally and systematically omits the true costs of a war, it commits a grave injustice against those who have died in it and against those whose taxes pay for it.