Exercising my demons...

[Tim(e)]

Sorry if this is going to be a little depressing, but last night as I lay in bed trying to sleep, I couldn't help thinking of what must have been going through the mind of Nicholas Berg in his last moments, and what kind of person could actually carry out such an act. To me, regardless of the motivations of the executioners, that was an act of pure unadulterated evil.

I suppose that ever since a friend of mine was a victim of the Bali bombing, I have become slightly obsessed with the thought of dying in such horrific circumstances, and what must go through the victim's mind... something many never really give a second thought until they have some sort of connection to the event (and I count myself in that category).

This is not in any way supposed to be a politically motivated post, but I can't help thinking that the occupation of Iraq and the subsequent recent events in the prison camps, has given rise to a whole new generation of martyrs/terrorists and as a result, has made the world a far less safe place to live in. (A little cultural insensitivity can go a long way.)

What scares me most though is not a concern for my own safety, but the truly chilling thought of what kind of world my/our children are going to inherit.

Like I said at the beginning, sorry if you find this in any way depressing, but I was just trying to exorcise a few demons that have been flying around in my head lately.

[spooky girlfriend]

I share some of your thoughts - worrying about our children and what they will inherit. Although I truly believe every sober parent has worried the same way about what kind of shape their world was in at the time they raised their children. I justify myself bringing chidlren into the world by believing that somehow I can raise them to make a difference. A lot of reason why I don't spend as much time on the board as I would sometimes like. Duty calls.

I also would like to know what my brother thought in the last few minutes of his life. Since after two autopsies and two years we still have the cause of death listed as "undetermined" on his death certificate, all we have to know is that he died in his bedroom one morning for no apparent reason. I worry that he might have had pain, and although I know he died alone at the young age of 32, I know deep down that at least he died in the privacy and comfort of his own bedroom in his own home. That in some ways softens the blow for me. I now turn my attention to helping raise his son, my nephew, who is now almost four. My own four children consider it part of their responsibility as well, not to mention all DrS has done for him and my sister-in-law.

I understand your feelings and don't consider it morbid - just deep and thoughtful. It makes me know that you must be the kind of person who loves your family very much and wants safety and a better world for them.

Thanks for sharing. We all have our demons.

[wehitandrun]

Being the selfish ass I am... upon seeing the subject of this post, I thought you were taking a shot at me.

Exorcising!

I have seen the Berg clip, and it was definitly not an act of good. Evil... I'm not so sure about. That is a whole different culture, and I've learned not to judge what I don't understand. It was definitly a case of innocent casualty, but that is "war", and America is guilty of some disgusting deeds as well.

That horrible clip, in only 30 of its seconds, explains why I'm not a fan of religion.

"ALLAH! ALLAH!" is all you can hear in the background.

[Tim(e)]

Thanks for your comments Spooky... I can never put myself in your position obviously, but I have to admire you for the added responsibilities you have taken upon yourself. Your nephew is very lucky to have you and the good DrS - I am sure he will do very well indeed.

WH&R - yes Americans are guilty of attrocities in the name of war (Mai Lai being one that immediately springs to mind), we Australians are guilty of a attrocities against the original inhabitants of this country as well... but it was the manner in which the execution was carried out that made me label it as pure evil - and videoing the event and posting it on the internet I would think is in no way related to the fundamentalist culture... even the Lebanese Hezbolah denounced the act. But as I said before, I did not really want this to be a politically motivated discussion.

[wehitandrun]

Yes, I understand what you're saying.

[bobster]

Tim(e) -- I didn't know about your connection to the Bali bombing, my belated condolences.

It's a cliche, but it's true. Things like this are part of a cycle. I'm not a pacifist, I was in favor of what we did in Afganistan, at least in principle if not in the particulars (for one thing, our reliance on air power and bombing).

But at times you have to wonder if a pacific response wouldn't be better. And you also have to wonder, just why do we place the killing of that one, single civilian in a different category that the thousands who've been killed as, in that disgusting term, "collateral damage" which really translates as "people we'd have just as soon not killed, but not enough to actually do anything to prevent it"? Is Nicholas Berg any less dead than they? Was his death that much more horrific, just because any one of us can view it if they have the stomach? (I don't.)

I'm not saying they're equvalent, but an innocent person dead by someone else's hand is usually called a murder victim. Maybe we'd all be better off if we at least considered this.

[wehitandrun]

Yeah, part of me agrees with you Bobster.

But, it's not just that these are deaths are "un-equivalant"... but they are on an entirely different saucer.

For lack of a better analogy, Berg is the new Jesus.

[Pov]

Tim(e) -- I didn't know about your connection to the Bali bombing, my belated condolences.

But at times you have to wonder if a pacific response wouldn't be better. And you also have to wonder, just why do we place the killing of that one, single civilian in a different category that the thousands who've been killed as, in that disgusting term, "collateral damage" which really translates as "people we'd have just as soon not killed, but not enough to actually do anything to prevent it"? Is Nicholas Berg any less dead than they? Was his death that much more horrific, just because any one of us can view it if they have the stomach? (I don't.)

I'm not saying they're equvalent, but an innocent person dead by someone else's hand is usually called a murder victim. Maybe we'd all be better off if we at least considered this.

Any loss of innocent life is tragic. But I think there is a big difference. In one case, we are targeting a terrorist who is cowardly hiding within a civilian population. We should try to avoid collateral damage, but as long as that civilian population is willing to give that terrorist safe haven then some innocent loss of life may be inevitable (of course efforts should be made to avoid it). In the other case, a civilian was specifically targeted in order to make some political or religious point and win support among like believers.

I know you are not saying they are equivalent, but I'll go a step further and say that they are certainly NOT equivalent. Anyone who believes they are equivalent is just playing into the terrorist game, making terrorism a "win-win" proposition for terrorists. Here's how the game is played - the terrorist kills some innocent American(s) or Israeli(s) and receives accolades and support from like minded people. He hides among those people to ensure that, when the retaliation comes, non-terrorists are also at risk. When non-terrorists are killed in the retaliation, he makes a big deal of the loss of innocent life and the world criticizes the nation that was victimized in the first place.

[pophead2k]

Tim(e), thank you for a provocative and well-timed post. My best friend passed away a year ago yesterday, and so my own thoughts were somewhat melancholy the last few days. Although her death was not unexpected (cancer), I often wonder about what she thought and felt that last day. I am also sorry about your loss in the horrific event in Bali.

I think things like the Nicholas Berg case put an all too human face on the capability for evil that human beings of all political and religious stripes possess. And whether it is a summary execution by Islamic fundamentalists or death by torture in a US run prison, they are all very human casualties of war.

War demands casualties. As right thinking people, we each have to decide for ourselves if the war is justified. Most would argue FOR the justification of WW2 for instance. I have thought about this from every angle I could, and I can find no justification for the level of US involvement in Iraq. I pray for peace of mind for everyone who has lost someone in this terrible war.

[bobster]

[quote="Pov"][quote="bobster"]Wshould try to avoid collateral damage, but as long as that civilian population is willing to give that terrorist safe haven then some innocent loss of life may be inevitable (of course efforts should be made to avoid it). In the other case, a civilian was specifically targeted in order to make some political or religious point and win support among like believers. [quote]

This is an old argument, suffice it to say I'm not convinced that "we" (here I think we mean Americans and Israelis) try hard enough or, sometimes, at all.

I'll I'm really saying is that dead is dead, and hiding behind our sense of moral superioty does absolutely nothing to change that -- certainly not in the minds of the victims' families. While there's no doubt in my mind that Berg's murderers are truly evil, and the soldiers who do the actual collateral damage are usually far from evil, that doesn't change the end result and we take far too much comfort from that distinction.

[Pov]

I'll I'm really saying is that dead is dead, and hiding behind our sense of moral superioty does absolutely nothing to change that.

It's not about a sense of moral superiority, it's about causation. In the case of collateral damage, the death is caused by the terrorist hiding himself within a civilian population center. On the other hand, the terrorists actively and intentionally target innocent civilians in order to enhance shock value. Yes, dead is dead, but does that mean that the terrorist should be able to protect himself by hiding among civilians?Should we never got to war whenever there is a risk of civilian casualties? In WWII a lot of innocent German civilians were killed along with Nazi troops; did that fact make it wrong to try to defeat the Nazis?

[Mike Boom]

"....but they are on an entirely different saucer."

"For lack of a better analogy, Berg is the new Jesus."

- This has me rather befuddled???

[wehitandrun]

Berg's death and the deaths of every other war casualty are by no means "equivalent" is what I was saying.

That's why there is the public outcry for him... if you don't see it, it's like it never happened.

And, well, Jesus wasn't the only martyr'ed crucifixion, but people sure act like it.

[bobster]

quote]

It's not about a sense of moral superiority, it's about causation. In the case of collateral damage, the death is caused by the terrorist hiding himself within a civilian population center. On the other hand, the terrorists actively and intentionally target innocent civilians in order to enhance shock value. Yes, dead is dead, but does that mean that the terrorist should be able to protect himself by hiding among civilians?Should we never got to war whenever there is a risk of civilian casualties? In WWII a lot of innocent German civilians were killed along with Nazi troops; did that fact make it wrong to try to defeat the Nazis?

It's very convenient to blame the terrorists for "making" us do bad things. But lets say some a serial killer hid in your neighborhood and couldn't be found and arrested by conventional methods. Would it be okay for the police to bomb your neighborhood?

I'm not against all warfare, and I realize that in war innocent people always get murdered -- though even with the Allies in WWII much of it was avoidable and happpened for the worst of reasons. What I am against is the habit of making war which we have fallen into. It's something we do as regularly as brush our teeth. There are other ways of dealing with some situations and some problems without military solutions and where the military option only makes matters exponentially worse.

What I am also against is the dishonesty that allows us to cling to a false sense of moral superiority -- not so much over our enemies as over our less gung-ho (i.e., saner) allies.

[clairequilty]

I did a quicky Control-F search on this thread. And I was somewhat surprised to find that in the entire set of posts thus far, no one has bothered to mention 9/11.

The Nick Berg beheading is a tragedy, but to blame the fanatical hatred of the US on the invasion of Iraq is a wide stretch. By more than a few accounts, Bush was much softer on terrorism than Clinton pre-911. My "liberal" friends speak to the fact that Clinton had an extensive track record of pursuing Al Queida and Bin Laden that Bush ignored when he came into office. Richard Clarke makes this pretty clear. So, if this is the case, why did Al Queida wait until Bush came along to release the greatest terrorist act in the history of North America? Were they protesting Bush's "Tax Cuts for the wealthy"?

The fact of the matter is that this war that the world, yes, the world, is in, is of tantamount importance. You can disagree with the methods, and the jury is still out as to whether taking Saddam Hussein out of power was or wasn't a positive move for the world.

But blaming the US war policy in Iraq for the continued hatred of the US seems to me to be a short sighted view to say the least.

But being one of the few outspoken conservatives on the board I will now shut up, take my seat, and pursue my never ending task of counting my money and spitting on the homeless.

[bobster]

I actually didn't say anything about the ancient question of "why they hate us" and I didn't bring up 9/11 because I didn't think I had to. Of course, Al Quaida didn't need Iraq as an excuse to do what they do -- it's just that our response gives others plenty of new reasons to hate them and those reasons, for some, will become conflated with the goals of groups like Al Quaida. Much like the way the Waco and Ruby Ridge incidents led to greater recruitment for our U.S. domesteic terrorists.