IF WE ATTACK SADDAM, HIV WILL HAVE WON:

A puzzle for future historians: Why focus on Iraq and not AIDS? (Sebastian Mallaby, October 15, 2002, The Washington Post)

Here, surely, is the puzzle for future historians. How could we Americans, a society with the technology to land a missile on Saddam Hussein's bathmat, not mobilize the science necessary to defeat the scourge? How could the United States, a nation that spends $10 billion a year on soaps and perfumes, give $1 billion in public money annually for battling the virus and regard that as enough? How is it that we have known about AIDS for two decades yet only now are starting to react? [...]

The real reason for our muted reaction is that AIDS is so monotonous. The AIDS pandemic is silent, repetitive and boring. People are upset the first few times they hear about it. Then they move on.

Actually, the real reason is that we understand AIDs to be a function of behavior, a threat that we can control, at least in our own personal lives. Saddam Hussein, on the other hand, is frightening precisely because we can't control him. Posted by Orrin Judd at October 16, 2002 12:30 AM