In what military strategists are calling a 'textbook demonstration of overkill,' the United States and Israel have launched a campaign against Iran that has left thousands dead and the concept of proportionality sobbing in a corner. The death toll, still rising faster than a pint of stout on a Friday night, is now estimated at — well, nobody is quite sure, because counting bodies is apparently a job for the international community, not the people dropping the bombs. Enter the United Kingdom, that bastion of moral outrage and lukewarm tea, which has called for an independent casualty count. Yes, an independent count. Because nothing says 'we profoundly deplore this violence' quite like asking someone else to do the maths while you polish your parliamentary brass.
Let us pause to savour the exquisite absurdity. The bombs are falling. The missiles are singing their terrible songs. And the British government, with all the urgency of a librarian shushing a sneeze, has requested a tally. Not a ceasefire. Not a withdrawal. A count. It is like asking for a menu while the restaurant burns down around you. 'Could we get a headcount of the charred, please? For our records.'
The squabbles over casualty figures could deafen the angels. The US and Israel insist their strikes were 'surgical,' which is a marvellous euphemism for 'we aimed at things and everything exploded.' Iran's numbers are inevitably dismissed as propaganda, which is rich coming from nations that have turned 'collateral damage' into a growth industry. And the UK, perched on its island of self-regard, wants an independent body to sort the truth from the wreckage. Because if there is one thing the world needs right now, it is more committees.
But here is the kicker. The UK's call for an independent count is not a humanitarian impulse. It is a political gambit, a way to appear virtuous while doing absolutely nothing. It is the diplomatic equivalent of tutting. 'Oh dear, how terrible. Someone fetch a calculator.' It allows the government to sidestep the real question: should they be aiding and abetting this butchery? After all, British bases are likely supporting the campaign, British intelligence is probably whispering sweet nothings in American ears, and British foreign policy is as aligned with Washington as a badly hung door. To call for a count is to acknowledge the death without questioning the cause. It is to weep over the spilt milk while ignoring the cow being beaten to death in the corner.
This is the modern world in a nutshell. We are all now living in a giant spreadsheet, where human lives are reduced to cells and columns. The left demands accountability, the right demands victory, and the centre demands a well-formatting report. Meanwhile, the dead do not care about your pie charts.
What we need is not a count. We need a reckoning. We need to ask why the US and Israel, with all their might, cannot find a way to resolve disputes without reducing cities to rubble. We need to ask why the UK, with all its history and diplomacy, can do no more than request a tally. We need to ask why we accept this theatre of death as normal.
But that is too much to ask. Far easier to count. Count the dead. Count the dollars. Count the minutes until the next outrage. Count the ways we have failed.
So, by all means, let us have an independent count. Let the boffins and bureaucrats descend upon the smoking ruins with clipboards and calculators. Let them tally the dead, the wounded, the displaced. Let them produce a report, beautifully bound, with graphs and tables. And then let us file it away, next to all the other reports, and prepare for the next war.
Because that is what we do. We count, we tut, we move on. And the bombs keep falling.
