reply to post by Jameela
Thank you for your reply and link. Ah, yes, the CIA man had been in prison in Pak versus the quick return of the soldier in Afgh to America.
what you and I might be remembering re Saudi "blood money"(?). Yes, it was refused, but not by the victims themselves.
9/11 monetary relief caused the same valuations of a life you bring up:
In the report he delivered to Congress, Special Master Kenneth Feinberg pronounced the Victim Compensation Fund a success. More than 98 percent of
those eligible participated. Only a handful of families sued the airlines.
But Feinberg has also written that the formula was “defective.” He found valuing life to be an almost impossible task. “The family of the
stockbroker and that of the dishwasher,” he wrote, “should receive the same check.” Or no check at all.
The Victim Compensation Fund, he says, is not a model that should be repeated.
Burke, Hamdani and Wolf all said the money raised questions for them, even though they accepted it.
“Loking at it from the Muslim perspective, there is a clause in Sharia law that if blood has been shed and victim's family are willing to be
compensated, it is allowed,” Hamdani said. “And this is what that was. The only thing is, our government paid it out. Does that make the
government accountable? That is another debate but it came in handy.”
And in the end, there is no way to put a price on life.
Even American courts must place a value on a life, in "wrongful death" suits, for ex.
If, to the Afgh victims' families, the "blood money" was sufficient, would that satisfy that justice had been done, regardless of what you and I
Law and reparations can be debated
, but in the end the loss of
innocent life is always a tragedy. War truly is Hell. Too bad those politicians who sent troops to war a decade ago never themselves went to war.