WHY DO so many leading U.S. politicians make mass murder sound like an ad for L’Oréal?
Go back to May 1996, when Leslie Stahl of 60 Minutes sat down with Madeleine Albright, the then-U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. “We have heard that a half million children have died,” Stahl said, referring to the reported impact of United Nations sanctions on Iraq. “I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And—and you know, is the price worth it?”
To which the dead-eyed Albright replied: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price—we think the price is worth it.”
Half a million dead kids. Worth it. A now-infamous statement, which was much-quoted across the Middle East, yet provoked no public outcry in the United States at the time: no banner headlines, no scathing op-eds, no political fallout whatsoever. In fact, the very next year, the much-lauded Albright was promoted to secretary of state. It would take the former Clinton administration official seven long years to show even an ounce of regret or contrition for her outrageous remark, finally calling it “crazy” and a “terrible mistake” in her 2003 memoir, Madam Secretary.
Now, fast forward to March 2018.
“All the damage that would come from a war [with North Korea] would be worth it in terms of long-term stability and national security,” Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said in an interview with CNN last week.
What would that “damage” look like? Whether nuclear or non-nuclear, multiple studies and surveys of experts suggest millions of innocent North Koreans, South Koreans and Japanese could be killed in such a conflict, making the wars in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan look like minor skirmishes in comparison.
…