Home / Why Do Attacks in London Matter More Than Ones in Baghdad?

Why Do Attacks in London Matter More Than Ones in Baghdad?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Phillip Adams of The Australian has an article that raises a good point in the beginning:

IT’S a quiet, ho-hum, run-of-the-mill day in Iraq. Just a few bombs will explode in Baghdad. Only a few dozen will be killed or maimed. Fifty or 60 max. With the victims predominantly locals – only a couple of US soldiers among the casualties – they’ll hardly rate a mention. Won’t crack it for the Nine Network or ABC news. Perhaps a brief para in tomorrow’s broadsheets.

Oh, almost forgot. There’ll be about 20 kidnappings today. This has been a big racket in Iraq for a year or more with thousands of locals snatched off the streets. Nothing political about it, nothing religious. Just a grab bag of businesspeople and schoolchildren to be held for ransom. So many children are kidnapped these days that parents are keeping them home.

Will these incidents be reported in the US, Britain and Australia? No, they won’t. Not news. Just further symptoms of a totally dysfunctional society. Unless, of course, if one of the kidnapped is one of us. Then all media hell will break lose.

Yes, what happened last week in London was appalling. But it happens every day in Iraq. It has since the coalition of the willing, of which Australia was such a willing member, came thundering in more than two years ago.

I agree to the extent that Adams says Iraq bombings do not generate the coverage that an attack that London does. I’m conflicted in the belief that this is somehow wrong when you factor in that it is not a normal day when London gets bombed and in Baghdad, it’s a daily thing. But, we don’t hold moments of silence for soldiers killed or moments of silence for Iraqi civilians who are maimed at the hands of the terrorists.

Does it have something to do with the fact that we can identify better with our British allies? They speak our language, are the same religion, long time allies, etc.? However, the Iraqis are in a fierce struggle for their freedoms and the United States is putting our faith in them. Wouldn’t citizen support and Presidential Statements to “keep the fight going” help the Iraqis? Wouldn’t that show them that we are thinking of them in their moments of need?

Regardless of what the true answer is to this, the eternal truth is that all terrorism is a horrible thing and each act should elicit condemnation and horror of the attack, and rage and retribution towards the perpetrators.

For more commentary from Art Green, visit his blog Conservative Eyes

Edited: LI

Powered by

About Art Green

  • Nancy

    I wish I could say it was because Iraq get bombed daily, so it’s not a shock, whereas everyone was hoping Europe would be relatively secure? except that no one seems to be much excised about problems w/arab muslims slaughtering african muslims, either, so I can’t day that race has nothing to do with it. Maybe it’s muslims vs ‘muslims’, so all the non-muslims figure let them go at each other…?

  • balletshooz

    probably the reason is because most right wingers want to politicize terror because they have a sick, perverse hope that everytime people are killed in a terror tradgedy Bush’s approval rating will go up. So they play up every tradgedy to put out the fear card in hoes of political gain. they are clearly going to the well on this way too much.

    I had the same thought about the London attack. Gee, doesnt an attack this bad happen every day in Iraq and noone bats an eyelash. do these people not care because Iraqi’s are brown muslims, innocent nonetheless.

  • JR

    What, and admit we’ve been backing the wrong side for 50 years? Get real!

    Pakistan is our loyal ally against terror. My President told me so. Would he mislead me?

  • Stop supporting Pakistan then

  • Aaman–“The U.S. is like a rich relative, and poor country cousins are more apt to come to the door of rich cousins when there is a tragedy than the other way around.”
    You mean when they need something…
    U.S. taxpayer’s support too many poor cousins as it is!
    D L

  • To put another spin on things, India, and many other countries faced terrorist attacks for a long time to the seeming unconcernedness of the U.S. Reminds one of the ancient saying that “thou shalt not covet Croesus’ wife”

  • Hate to break it to you, but it seems like it was only an initial furor this side of the pond.

    The real travesty was President Bush not visiting Britain, although he was in the United Kingdom. The U.S. is like a rich relative, and poor country cousins are more apt to come to the door of rich cousins when there is a tragedy than the other way around.

    Your general point is very valid, not that it will matter to the media coverage meisters.

  • Eric Olsen

    very important point Art and I’m glad you made it