Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site astrovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!ulysses!princeton!astrovax!gam
From: gam@astrovax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Our casualties vs. their casualties
Message-ID: <104@astrovax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-Nov-83 11:26:21 EST
Article-I.D.: astrovax.104
Posted: Thu Nov  3 11:26:21 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 6-Nov-83 13:37:37 EST
Organization: Princeton Univ. Astrophysics
Lines: 27

There's one thing about people's perceptions of international politics which 
I never understood: 

	Why do people (in this country) care more about the lives of U.S.
Marines then about Lebanese or Grenadian civilians?
The men in the first group have volunteered (and are paid) to risk their 
lives for the sake of their country, while this is obviously not the case for
the people in the second group. 

While I feel strong grief for the sake of the 300 Marines (that should be the
official toll of the Beirut airport bombing in a few days), I also feel the
same for the 60 French Soldiers as well. These 360 men altogether died in a 
horrifying manner. Furthermore, I feel strong sympathy for the families of 
these victims, as I think I can understand what it feels like to lose your 
son.

However, let's face it: the U.S. marines as well as the French soldiers sent
to Lebanon have not been drafted against their will (the French army wisely
keeps its draftees in France, except for a few who become teachers in third
world countries). They are not much different from mercenaries.

This attitude, which I am questioning, is present on this net, as well
as in the media. Why has there been only one letter (until the story of the
bombing of the hospital came out) asking about the casualities among the 
Grenadian civilians? Clearly they are the number one victims, having to hide 
in their homes for a week following the military coup (that prompted the U.S. 
invasion), and now probably caught in the middle of the fighting.