Thoughtful comments on the recent statements by the father of murder victim Nick Berg posted over at the Yin Blog:



Now, it is a fair criticism to say that the war hasn't been worth it; that we haven't planned properly for the aftermath; etc. However, Mr. Berg's fury is based on the fact that his son and 11,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the war, and the media is ignoring coverage of them. First, the media has covered Nick Berg's grisly death, and I can't imagine that there are many Americans who haven't felt terrible upon hearing about his beheading.



But more importantly, if Mr. Berg is going to be an advocate for those who suffer but receive no attention, shouldn't he also address the thousands of Iraqis who would have been tortured or killed by Saddam or his sadistic sons had the invasion not occurred? During the years 1991-2003, the media was certainly not doing a good job of reporting on Saddam's atrocities.



The comments are worth a read, too.



For the record, I tend to agree. I hold the highest respect for Michael Berg's right to mourn the horrific death of his son, both privately and publicly. On the other hand, I feel his political position is a bit simplistic. While it is fair to cite Iraqi and US fatalities as a point in the case against war, it is important not to minimize the countless deaths under Hussein's regime. This is far too complex an issue to sustain a lopsided argument.