A further step should be taken. In my dealings with U.S. military officials here, they have shown regret and remorse for the deaths and injuries of civilians. Systematically recording and publicly releasing civilian casualty numbers would assist in helping the victims who survive to piece their lives back together.
A number is important not only to quantify the cost of war, but as a reminder of those whose dreams will never be realized in a free and democratic Iraq.
So said Marla Ruzicka, who "was founder of the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict. In 2003, she organized surveyors across Iraq to document civilian casualties. Before that, she managed a similar project in Afghanistan that helped to secure assistance from the U.S. government for civilian victims." She did so a few weeks before her death; an interview with Unfiltered on Air America can be found here.
And, I agree with her wholeheartedly: about a year or so ago, I noted two underreported things were the failure to find WMDs and the Iraqi death toll. Bad news is not exactly something our government likes to collect, as suggested by the decision to not report statistics showing how the rate of terrorism has been on the increase.
We might recall how Secretary Rice's predecessor had to correct an implication that it went down. Ms Ruzicka's editorial, as sort of voice from the grave, suggests (as is the norm) that the numbers are there if we had the will. As Sen. Leahy noted in his eulogy for her on the Senate floor, it is after all our moral obligation to do so.
Meanwhile, we have to deal with the Senate confirming the likes of Negroponte as intelligence czar 98-2, and make the push for a civilian draft much more likely to be a necessity.* Perhaps, just perhaps, Bolton is gone, even if the President proclaims opposition just to be rank politics. As compared to just rank, I guess.
---
* Philip Carter, military guy and Bush opponent, does make a credible case. He offers a "national service" approach that bears some comparison to the constitutional concept of "militia" for the modern era:
Students could choose to fulfill their obligations in any of three ways: in national service programs like AmeriCorps (tutoring disadvantaged children), in homeland security assignments (guarding ports), or in the military. Those who chose the latter could serve as military police officers, truck drivers, or other non-combat specialists requiring only modest levels of training. (It should be noted that the Army currently offers two-year enlistments for all of these jobs, as well as for the infantry.) They would be deployed as needed for peacekeeping or nation-building missions. They would serve for 12-months to two years, with modest follow-on reserve obligations.