Why No Outrage Over U.S. Killing of Children?

by | Jul 8, 2018

Why No Outrage Over U.S. Killing of Children?

by | Jul 8, 2018

National outrage over President Trump’s policy of separating immigrant children from their parents as a way to deter illegal immigration into the United States has forced the president to abandon the policy. The outrage came from all sides of the political spectrum, especially from the left, and from the mainstream media.
Trump’s policy is obviously cruel and brutal, given that it uses children as pawns to achieve a political end. No matter how much psychological damage is inflicted on children owing to the fear that comes with forced separation, the idea is that such emotional damage is worth it given the aim of preventing or discouraging illegal immigration to the United States.
What’s strange, however, is that while there has been mass outrage over Trump’s separation policy, there is virtually no outrage over the U.S. government’s policy of killing children as a way to achieve the political goal of regime change in foreign countries.
Consider, for example, the brutal system of U.S. sanctions on Iraq, which the Clinton administration enforced during the 1990s. Year after year, it contributed to the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi children, especially since the sanctions prevented Iraq from repairing the water-and-sewage treatment plants that the Pentagon had intentionally bombed during the Persian Gulf War.
Read the rest at www.fff.org.

Jacob Hornberger

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

View all posts

Our Books

Recent Articles

Recent

Supreme Court Ends Federal War on Gun-Owning Potheads

Supreme Court Ends Federal War on Gun-Owning Potheads

Yesterday, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down a pretext that the feds have used to nullify the constitutional rights of more than fifty million Americans. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited gun ownership by anyone who is "an unlawful user of or addicted to...

read more
Strategic Ambiguity (If We Must)

Strategic Ambiguity (If We Must)

In recent years, critics on both sides of the aisle have taken aim at the longstanding policy of strategic ambiguity toward Taiwan. They argue that Washington should abandon ambiguity and embrace “strategic clarity,” explicitly pledging to fight China over Taiwan....

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This