4/2/02 - hi david

i hate to be a pain in the ass, but anyway. i was curious about the 'iraq bodycount' link? it seems to me a bit arbitrary to start the 'bodycount' at the start of the war, since civilians have been dying very terrible deaths (via starvation, torture and murder) for 25+ yrs under Saddam. check this out for balance.. http://www.indict.org.uk/ .. im not taking a position 'for' or 'against'. i just don't feel that smart. the only position i feel qualified to take is seated. i feel an iraq war bodycount is arbitrary. im really confused about this entire 'war' thing. i hear alot of people telling Bush to stop the killing, but i don't hear those same people telling Saddam to stop killing. i don't see the balance , the middle way. any thoughts are appreciated.

DC responds: Thanks for your point there. We need a Saddam caused Iraqi body count as well - and Allied and Iraq military body counts and wounded for all those categories. And we're sure going to stop Saddam from killing anymore. Also, like you point out, the sanctions have been killing civilians indirectly for over a decade to such an extent that it's highly unlikely that the war will do anything but reduce civilian deaths in the long run. But I guess that I have the body count up because it's the ones we're killing, not him, and I feel responsible. Anyway, I hope as few people as possible die from this war and that it's over as soon as it can be and that all works out well.