some thoughts on day 1

[joshua levithan]

This is long and rambling, and I don't think my ideas
are very coherent.  Forgive me, list-mates, for
venting in this manner, and perhaps you should click
away.

The only way Islamic extremists can profit from this
event is to create a wider sense of Jihad.  The
parallels to the beginning of the first world war are
frightening.  Granted, if one subscribes to the
Keegan/Van Creveld treatment, we have nothing like the
colonial tensions, anglo-german friction, overstressed
alliance system, etc.  However, we have a terrorist
act which so shocks a large nation that it may demand
to violate the sovereignty of a smaller one. 
Yesterday was of a different universe than the
assasination of Franz Ferdinand, and whoever
perpetrated this is much more fanatical and much
better organized, in short, far more dangerous, than
the bumbling group of Serbian radicals of 1914.  What
if we find that Afghanistan harbored these people? 
Will our demands, our attacks, on an Islamic state, no
matter how fundamentalist and "roguish" not draw a
sense of similarity from a wider range of muslims? 
The vast majority of muslims deplored yesterdays
attack, because the vast majority of muslims and of
all people are decent and no friend to terrorism.  But
the fact remains that just as Christianity as a
doctrine and as a religion left a place for the
crusades and for the millennia of violent
anti-semitism, Islam leaves a place for a
suicidally-conducted holy war against outsiders.  If
the U.S. responds by attacking broadly, not only will
we create future suicide bombers in the inevitable
orphans and victims of "collateral damage" (since this
time we will have to use aircraft and ground troops,
and not the pathetic gestures of cruise missiles) and
we may drive decent, human muslims, many of whom are
very anti-american, to choose their religion in a holy
war.

I see no way to win the war against terrorism, but
that is hardly the point right now, since it is not a
war that the U.S. chose, in any meaningful way, to
fight.  Yes, we should look to Israel, and we should
not repeat their mistakes, but whatever one thinks of
Israel's level of guilt towards the Palestinians, the
U.S. cannot rationally be lumped into the bargain. 
Also, keep in mind that the second intifada began
after unprecedented offers from the Israeli
leadership, including Jerusalem as a capital.  However
wronged and however oppressed, many of the
Palestinians have chosen their current fight.
But back to the U.S.-- there is another way we will
have to learn from Israel, and that is to quietly do
away with outdated 19th century concepts such as the
rules of war.  I applaud the idea of bringing
terrorists to justice in an international court, and I
share the horror of Europeans at the U.S.'s recent
misbegotten policies of isolationism.  But that is a
lovely pipe-dream for another time.  Israel can't win
the war its fighting against Palestinians, but it can,
and is, winning the battles.  for every successful
attack, dozens, maybe hundreds of potential attacks
are being stopped by the world's best
counter-terrorism experts.  and "stopped" means by
legal means and by assasinations, by killing suspected
terrorists without absolute proof.  That's what you do
in a total, irregular war.  It would be great if we
all had lines and uniforms.  But look what happened
yesterday. 
It's very sad, and we can hope or pray that the U.S.'s
response is measured and does not cost the lives of
innocents.  But this is not a just world community,
this is a world full of terror and hatred. I wish we
didn't have nations and governments, and I wish that
this government was more liberal and right-minded
about the world community.  But we do have
governments, and they have no reason to exist if they
do not protect their people from violence.  And so our
government will do its best, now.  One thinks of a
transplanted New Yorker singing "...and no religion
too."  Well, I wish, but there is going to be more
blood shed.

Finally, and I apologize to all of you for the ranting
quality of this email, I want to address what two of
you wrote.  I consider myself a far-left,
socialist-sympathetic liberal, and I am ashamed at all
of the evil wrought by my big, selfish, ugly country. 
I try now to resist the slide into jingoism and
patriotism, and I must admit, Congress singing leaves
as poor a taste in my mouth as a half-elected idiot
mouthing a poorly-written speech.  We won't defend
freedom, we will defend ourselves; and freedom will
likely be a casualty, at least temporarily.  HOWEVER.
Where do you get off treating the united states as the
root of all evil?  The Israelis were sanctioned by the
U.N., and they were attacked again and again.  The
U.S. supports Israel partially because of American
Jews like myself, and partially because Israel has a
right to exist.  The cold war was misguided and the
direction taken by American foreign policy in Africa,
Asia, the Middle East, and Central and Southern
America was horrific, and often criminal.  The U.S.
should take more responsibility for what it did then
and for what it continues to do.  But it is utterly
wrong to combine issues of political behavior and
responsibility with acts of intentional mass murder. 
We tried to fight limited wars during the Cold War--we
caused suffering in many countries, but we didn't do
this, or anything approaching it.  To be unable to
separate the too things as actions of totally
different kind, and no mere degree, is very, very
wrong.  The U.S. should take responsibility for crimes
and violent acts, for arming various people against
the Soviets.  But no matter how much the two are
connected in terms of people, places, and equipment,
they are completely dissimilar.  The United States
bears no responsibility for this attack, even if by
appearing to oppress Palestinians or other Muslims or
whoever did this and by arming them and training them
we in fact helped to facilitate it.  Indiscriminate
murder of civilians (though I think now, as in Israel
and other countries involved in a total war, the
archaic distinction is moot) is the responsibility of
the perpetrators.  That relates in no way to the
practicalities of U.S. action either, other than to
legitimize morally, in my view, the illegal actions
taken by Israel, such as the pre-emptive killing of
suspected would-be terrorists.  Yeah, I wish the world
were better too, but they just blew up my hometown,
and now we kill whoever seems to threaten similar
action.  But to return--this changes most things. 
Before we might look at Islamic extremists and see
some guilt in ourselves for having helped create them.
 Now that burden is lifted, I think.  The U.S. should,
in the far distant future now, look to undo the damage
it did in the cold war.  But for now, we should choose
our next foreign policy removes without any thought of
the isseus mentioned in the first email of this title.
 It's not relevant.  Did you see that plane diappear
into the side of that building?  Did you?
    As for the Italian cable car, it was a terrible
tragedy which could certainly have been handled
better.  It is fruitless and divisive of me to mix up
politics with a simple tragedy compounded by
unnecessary ill-will (leaving aside the question of
guilt of the soldiers involved) but I'm angry, and I
will avoid my better judgment.  Why, why did that come
up today?  How could an accident such as that even
_occur_ to someone pondering an attack that will kill
ten or twenty thousand people as even a point of
comparison for discussing anti-American feelings?  
Also, have you forgotten that the reason U.S. planes
are in Italy is that Italy could not defend itself
during the Cold War?  However fruitless that conflict
was, we were there.  Pearl Harbor, which is being
over-invoked right now, turned an isolationist nation
into the one that brought Hitler down faster and made
enough difference to save Western Europe from both
Hitler and Stalin.  And that was without a credible
attack on the U.S. mainland.  We're ugly, we're
ruining your culture with our money and our movies,
but we were there for democracy when the chips were
down.  Italians allowed Mussolini to come to power,
and American soldiers fought their way up the Italian
peninsula to rid you of him.  My grandfathers' friends
bled in your soil while most of you were passive or
supportive of Fascism.  We saved your country after
you screwed it up.  Is that such ancient history that
it should be utterly forgotten?  I apologize if my
bluntness causes pain.  I am a New Yorker.

To sum up, I don't think the question should be about
degrees of responsibility or portions of good and
evil.  Terrorism crosses a line.  As much as I would
like to be a complete Cynic and a good chaotic
Pynchonian, I believe that much to be true.  I am a
liberal, but after yesterday, all bets are off with
regard to those who helped that to occur, in any way. 
This, I must add, does not mean that I condone a
blundering, imprecise response.  Yes, our military is
creaky and still worried about Iraq and Korea.  In
fact, we had better get some Israeli specialists over
here right away to help train out soldiers.  So
hopefully the process of assigning blame will be a
long and precise one, and our outrage and hurt will
not drive the world into more widespread horror.  We
will not do anything as a nation that will make such
attacks as yesterday's reasonable or rational.  But we
can set up a state of war where it will certainly
follow that others are provoked to join a wider
struggle against the U.S.  And I wouldn't feel all
that secure in Denmark and Italy, either.  We're just
the richest and most powerful, and the best symbol. 
I don't have any faith, nor did I even before
yesterday.  But if you do, perhaps you should pray for
the ability to clearly distinguish bewteen what is
cruelty and hatred and guilt and the responsibility of
nations and what is baseless evil.  Pray, or muse
upon, the three new orphans that my family knows, and
the others we'll discover we know, and the others we
do not know.  Pray that there will be no new orphans
in Afghanistan or wherever American bombs and bullets
start to fly, and or that the inevitable orphans, the
inevitable victims of the inevitable atrocity of total
modern war master their hatred into at least something
human.  None of you know me, but if you did, you would
be disturbed to see me writing such exhortations. This
is disturbing, and it will pass, somewhat.  But
remember, the world is worse now than when we woke up
yesterday.  And it is not the fault of America, or
anyone else but a few evil men.
      I do not believe there is meaning in human
suffering, but like the strange friendship of Mason
and Dixon, or the little Christmas eve spark in that
English chapel, or the scrap of noble hope that
prevails in Roger Mexico, I still want to care.  But
we can't keep cool, you see.  So maybe if you're too
overwhelmed by all the suffering, you could pray for
that little thing, that little flight of decency and
beauty that flits throughout Pynchon's dark genius,
and pray it doesn't die in me or in you.  Maybe you
should write a poem, or do something nice for a loved
one, but you shouldn't look for something to blame,
should you. 

I hope I haven't offended, and I would welcome any
replies; I'm sure there are many gaps and imbalances
in my words that will be subject to criticism.

Josh

--- Arne Herløv Petersen <herlahp at inet.uni2.dk> wrote:
> David Morris wrote:
> > 
> > I guess we should just back away from Israel now
> that we know how MAD some
> > terrorists are at us...  Is that your suggestion?
> > 
> 
> 
> No, that is not my suggestion. But working for a
> durable peace in the
> Middle East was necessary Monday, and it's still
> necessary Wednesday.
> A durable peace means an agreement that both Israel
> and the Palestinians
> can live with. It was almost within reach a short
> time ago. In the long
> run a durable peace solution would probably entail
> an Israeli and a
> Palestinian state that can cooperate on areas of
> mutual interest inside
> a framework of agreements.
> It's very easy to enforce your will. It's very easy
> to win a war -
> provided you have the will to use all the weapons in
> your arsenal.
> It's much more difficult to win the peace.
> Nevertheless that's the road
> that must be taken.
> If the US goes to war against the Arabs because of
> this horrible attack,
> then Bin Laden has achieved exactly what he wants.
> The terrorists want
> nothing more than to derail the peace process. Don't
> help them.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com