The Barbarity of “Terrorism”
P. Schultz
January 21, 2012
“It has generally been acknowledged to be madness to go to
war for an idea, but if anything is more unsatisfactory, it is to go to war
against a nightmare.” Lord
Salisbury quoted in Ideal
Illusions, p.238.
“The notion of a ‘terrorist pathology’ offered both
Washington and human rights leaders a potent brew of the diseased, the
barbaric, the uncivilized, the not like
us – those, in short, at war with human rights.” [p. 238]
And then read this description of what must have been a
“terrorist” act: “it was an outrage, an obscenity. The severed hand on the
metal door, the swamp of blood and mud across the road, the human brains inside
a garage, the incinerated, skeletal remains of an Iraqi mother and her three
small children in their still smoldering car…by my estimate more than 20 Iraqi
civilians.”
But “As it happens, this is a description of the collateral
damage caused by two missiles from an American jet….It is an example of the
proportionality that makes ‘us’ different from ‘them’ because our intention was not to kill these
civilians, even if, as a Palestinian journalist has remarked, ‘this is deliberate killing – killing
deliberately by mistake.’ The killing is premeditated ‘in the literal sense
that it is clearly foreseen and contemplated beforehand, with the repeated
claim that those killed are the very minimum to be expected…’ This is the fine
distinction that makes us different from them.” [p. 239]
Isn’t the logic here a bit Jesuitical? Isn’t it like the
logic of “double effect” that some Catholics use to justify some abortions
needed to save a mother’s life? “Our intention was to save the mother’s life
and, inadvertently, we killed the baby. Oh, I am sorry. We aborted the fetus.” And
isn’t there something about dropping bombs on human beings that seems different than blowing them up
while standing next to them or even using the planes as bombs? Notice how we
say we “bomb” human beings, not that we incinerate
them. No, Jews were incinerated in
concentration camps; but the Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the
Germans in Dresden, were not. Except that they were.
These are the fine distinctions we like to make so as to
justify what we are doing to other human beings. And they are “fine,” but only
if our actions have no effect on our souls, only if our rationalizations can,
in fact, cleanse our souls. That this may not be possible is testified to by
those who come back from war with what is today labeled PTSD, which is a jargon
that also serves to disguise what it is we are doing to our souls. As Jefferson said about slavery, “I tremble
for my country when I remember that God is just.”
No comments:
Post a Comment