|
While al-Zarqawi was as deserving of his fate as any death-row criminal, his guilt isn't the question. If everyone who deserved punishment on the other of life in prison or, for those who believe in such things, the death penalty, were to receive their just deserts, the world would be a very different place and many of those who appear respectable or even world leaders might disappear as members of the group. One certainly wonders where our own "leaders" would be. Anyway, while I won't bother to defend al-Zarqawi, I won't support either the pride or the celebration of his murder/execution. Perhap most of those with him were likewise guilty and needed to be stopped--I haven't followed it closely (as I don't care for the pride-fest type coverage either), but I suspect there may indeed have been innocents present as well. Such is the fortunes of the use of military power; I didn't say "war", because this isn't a war in any proper sense. It may have been the only effective response given the time, place and circumstances and it may be argued to be justifiable as an act of law-enforcement against terrorists, but it's not something to be proud of and if there were innocents killed and alternative methods which would have prevented such "collateral" damage--it may actually be something deserving of shame.
In any case, this whole al-Zarqawi incident isn't the point--even the pathetic celebration and efforts to stimulate naked-blood lust (note the bump in Bush's poll numbers) is but a shadow of the real problem. That, of course, is the immense destruction and terrible quantity of human misery and death that has been unleashed in what was once an oppressive, but in relative terms, peaceful country. The point is the hundreds of thousands of unsung deaths, yes, hundreds of thousands--since the original Gulf war. Those were the results of the U.N. (U.S. surrogate) imposed "sanctions". Followed by the 30 to 100 thousand deaths as a result of Junior Bush's invasion, and then followed by the potentially slightly smaller number--but seemingly more painful (as most are due to individual acts of terror/murder/bombings) number killed either by U.S. troops fighting against insurrection (violently suppressing whole cities, like Fallujah). So far this year, six thousand IRAQIs from Bagdad alone have died, most of them violently. The violence is between factions composed of IRAQIs (who appear even more opposed to each other than Democrats and Republicans here). We've taken the cork off a bottle under pressure. IRAQIs live under difficult or deplorable conditions and now face almost unimaginable danger, violence and fear... and while we're primarily not behind it, we either can't or own't stop it.
On to your angst. My previous post wasn't properly respectful of either your feelings or the sentiment you expressed. It was a facetious reference to the mind control we witness every day, especially, of all places, here in America. It suggested that if you weren't feeling sufficiently bloodthirsty, you just needed some more FOX television. Sadly, that actually might very well work--if you we're morally weak enough to try and let yourself go along with the 'program'. Thank heavens you're not. What you're feeling represents the best, most noble of human nature--at least it's the complete antithesis of the worst of it.
Revenge is not the answer. I don't think the effort to remove al-Zarqawi was primarily 'revenge' as such, but rather just the most expedient way to be rid of him. It won't stop the terror or even slow it down, Zarqawi was losing his grip anyway, but it certainly stopped him and his closest associates. To kill the leaders of a terrorist organization just isn't revenge unless they've retired. Alas, while it won't stop the violence, it will probably change the it's character (and probably refocus it back on our troops, for better or worse). Revenge would be more along the lines of using unnecessary violence against IRAQIs because they had dared kill our troops when there's no tactical/strategic value in doing so. That is, if they were no longer a threat but we continued to attack them because they had once attacked us--we haven't reached that point yet. Haditha may well have been an example of overwrought troops reaching their limit and reacting in a vengeful violent manner; but if so, it was flawed in that they took their revenge on those who were innocent of past grievances. Just wait, though, there may come a time when real 'revenge' is taken. Even so, given the pent up anger Americans felt over Zarqawi's previous actions, his termination did give many Americans a sense of revenge. Here I am going on over subtle aspects of semantics when I agree, it was an ugly side of America that we saw when people expressed righteous joy at the news.
Obviously, at least to any reasonable or sane person--which does exclude most Republicans--the government's policies and the creation of terrorism are connected. Worse, given everything our fearless leader has done we can rest assured that millions of IRAQIs, Arabs and Muslims of all stripes and nationalities will hate us and pass that hate on generation after generation--ensuring an unlimited supply of ongoing terrorism against us and our allies far into the future. Which alas, is just the way Republican leaders like it--job security if you will. It's these people, their activities and motivations--as well as the success they've enjoyed and continue to enjoy that's where my own emotional exhaustion and mental angst lies. The death and destruction sucks, but like most Americans I must admit that out of sight, out of mind--well, not quite, but it's so huge, so unreal that it just blends into my current oppressively massive unhappiness over the world in general and America in specific.
As for me, though, if America was invaded that way, I just hope I'd be one of those figuring out how best to be rid of the invaders. I imagine myself sufficiently courageous, but depending upon how dangerous the actions called for are as well as how effective and numerous the occupying force is, could make such participation truly scary. Overt war, relatively speaking, generally calls for alot less courage--fighting with your buddies and you know what to expect mostly as compared to being on your own and having to think on your feet in unpredictable circumstances.
Actually, though, the IRAQI's could most easily have been rid of us by greeting us with flowers, letting us rebuild their country, letting us help them onto their feet internationally, waiting for our troops to be withdrawn and declaring independence then. Then again, we might've "corrupted" their culture with Democracy and equal rights for women so much that they'd never be able to put it back in the bottle.
In the end, we aren't entirely free of blame for any of the events in IRAQ or our government's involvement there since Nixon. We aren't to blame in the sense that we've thus far failed to recognize the war--the political war--even existed to the extent that it did/does, or even that we've been losing it for so long and now are all but completely defeated. We let our leaders do this. We didn't realize what they were doing and don't even now know much of what they've done and been doing around the world... but it was, in a sense, our responsibility to know, to find out, to care and to decide how we wanted our government to act in the world and make it so.
In that sense, the IRAQ war and all the vast harm and unfortunate outcomes associated with it are but small, peripheral concerns: we face our own war and that's where our attention needs to be focused. It hasn't become a war of violence and the few of us that even yet recognize it neither know how serious it is nor to what extremes we'll have to go to restore America to her potential. We aren't free except to a degree that doesn't matter. We have no control over our leaders; we are ruled. We've clung to the hope that our Democracy still works and can be restored from within despite repeat failures. We've been led to believe by the media--and to this extent alone, it seems they're right--that much of our fellow citizens like the way things about how our government and politics have been going that we don't. Therefore, if it's true that we have a disagreement with the other 'half' of America, it's not specifically that our government has been hijacked. If it's true, and the other side isn't just a misguided minority made to appear to be half the population, then we have a much more serious problem.
This ugly, violence loving, orgy of self-congratulation that has so disturbed you is actually but another face of the very serious problem we face politically across the board. I applaud your rejection of such immoral delights and hope you can use it to redouble your efforts against those very people politically--for they are very much our enemies and the enemy of the future of America. Every few generations, it seems, Americans have to once again fight to keep their freedom and way of life. It's our turn. This time, the enemy comes from within. Those who are celebrating the violence represent the way of thinking we must resist. Whether we know it or not... We are now in the fight of our lives.
Good luck and remember, despite the media exaggeration, not everyone was celebrating (though, appropriately few were sorry to see this terrorist go) and remember that it's just another reason we must continue our own struggle.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
