I didn't dare to open a newspaper today. Not a single one drew my interest. I already knew the gist, and I don't care for the finer details. No two papers had the same headline, but they all screamed the same nauseating exuberance of a false victory. Some were a bit more explicit, as with the New York Post's "Got Him! Vengeance at Last! US Finally Nails the Bastard!", or the New York Times' hilariously objective "Bin Laden Killed By US Forces In Pakistan, Obama Says, Declaring Justice Has Been Done." I didn't read any article today. I simply didn't want to. I didn't want to read about the minutiae of planning the operation while coordinating with all the relative intelligence agencies, or reactions from Congress, or anything diverting attention away from the reaction of the American people. How are we to feel?
If I were anyone else reading this post, I would snort haughtily and say "I'm to feel incredible! A blow for justice in the world has been dealt, and we are now vindicated!", but I'm not anyone else. I can't celebrate death, even in the taking of someone described as "enemy number 1." I can't, and I won't. A man was killed who, believe it or not, was fighting for his convictions and his way of life, however strange that way of life would seem when juxtaposed with ours. Here was a man who witnessed American and Israeli forces killing Lebanese civilians without so much as a second thought, and so to him, his actions were justified. Above all, he was a man, not a monster.
To him, the United States was the monster. It was a monster constituted of avarice and disregard for human life, one composed of demons and only a modicum of respectable people. He was not evil, he was not, as a rather ignorant classmate of mine so eagerly spouted today, a "dirtbag," and he was not so different from every American in the wake of 9/11. His unfortunate experiences colored his perspective on life, just like our experience did for us. If you cannot understand that, I express my condolences.
Turning someone into an object is easy; all it takes is a certain disregard for their past and their personality. It requires a lack of empathy and understanding that is so easy to elicit when in times of duress, as we are so eager to ease the pain of any inflicted wound.
To celebrate the killing of an enemy is to condone death to those we deem as "enemies." Could this lead to a belief that the world is monochromatic, that everything is simply good and evil and that we are always on the side of righteousness? I don't know. Somehow, I'd rather not find out.
That's all.
PART I:
ReplyDeleteThis is a comment to this post and the one before it.
Eli there is a serious flaw in your logic here that I feel is stemming from an underlying need to be cynical.
Let me preface what I'm about to say with this: I do not believe anyone should be killed/executed for any reason, no matter how awful any of their crimes are (Even Bin Laden). In addition, I agree with everything you've written about the hypocrisy of the US and the wrongs its done, as well as the stupidity of our nationalism.
Your blogs read as though we shouldn't be happy Bin Laden is no longer in power. There is all the reason to celebrate the removal of Bin Laden from the ranks of Al Qaeda. Should we celebrate his "death" ? No, certainly not, you should never celebrate death.
But this paragraph is especially frightening:
"To him, the United States was the monster. It was a monster constituted of avarice and disregard for human life, one composed of demons and only a modicum of respectable people. He was not evil, he was not, as a rather ignorant classmate of mine so eagerly spouted today, a "dirtbag," and he was not so different from every American in the wake of 9/11. His unfortunate experiences colored his perspective on life, just like our experience did for us. If you cannot understand that, I express my condolences."
Under this logic, no one can be held responsible for any of their "evil" actions. Yes, America has done many "evil" things. Yes, the rise in anti-american sentiment is the US' own fault, but that does not justify the actions of groups like al-Qaeda. Retaliation is no less unjust than the action that caused it.
PART II:
ReplyDeleteYou use the adjective "Reasonable" to describe Bin Laden. There is nothing ever reasonable about the killing of thousands of innocent people. Nothing ever justifies that, no matter how much the other side "influenced you." I'm really not sure the point you are trying to make. Reasonable? Like honestly. Mass murders, reasonable? Seriously poor choice of words
I ""understood Bin Laden's reasoning behind his malice towards the United States"" as well. But that does not mean I cannot celebrate his removal from power from an organization that has killed thousands of innocent people.
If Mr. Smith murders Mr. Jones because Mr. Jones his wife, Mrs. Smith, that does not mean Mr. Smith shouldn't be held accountable for murder. I realize that's an oversimplification. But its a metaphor that addresses this: "Could this lead to a belief that the world is monochromatic, that everything is simply good and evil and that we are always on the side of righteousness?" I understand the point you are trying to make, but there are certain ideals that ARE in fact "monochromatic." The idea that you shouldn't slaughter thousands of innocent people is one. Al Qaeda has violated this. And you know what, the US has violated this too! But that in no way makes Al Qaeda any less worse. This idea that our beliefs cannot be held universal (monochromatic), and are not always on the "good" side while holding that those who disagree are "evil" is generally correct. But that does not apply to everything, the slaughter of thousands certainly included.
"A man was killed who, believe it or not, was fighting for his convictions and his way of life, however strange that way of life would seem when juxtaposed with ours." You make it sound as though his way of life was justifiable. It was not. Killing innocent people is NEVER justifiable. Being a Muslim? Justifiable. Being Gay? Justifiable. Living you life as a Man-Baby?* Justifiable. Killing people? Not Justifiable ever. His convictions and way of life were in fact wrong.
Again, I just want to remind you I don't support the idea of killing him. (If it comes out they executed him and he was trying to surrender, then that is terrible; but lets face it, he would never go out alive) But I'm perfectly fine with celebrating that he is no longer part of Al Qaeda.
*http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/03/adult-baby-national-geographic-taboo_n_857074.html
I think you're misunderstanding cynicism for the desire to understand an opposing point of view.
ReplyDeleteI never said that we, as Americans, should not celebrate his deposition from power (though what does it really matter anyway, since there will always be another to replace him). My intent behind this post was to state that we should at least understand the reasoning behind the man rather than ignoring the events and facts that created him.
As Americans, we should first realize that our government, out of the need of the Cold War, essentially created our own worst enemy. To us, it was reasonable to arm Afghani rebels to kill and deter the Soviet invasion. What they did not calculate at the time, however, was that Bin Laden, as he stated in an interview in the 90's, would take the massacre of hundreds to thousands of Lebanese citizens so personally (I suppose this speaks to a greater conception of Muslim unity, but that's a tangential point altogether.).
I think should have clarified my operational definition of "reasonable." I meant that his logic followed a clear patter of A --> B, or "they did A, so I will attempt to retaliate in kind with B." Thus, his thought process, though barbaric, was quite clear, establishing that he was likely not beyond some kind of peaceful outcome (though he was likely far from willing to have any discussions with the US government).
The shame of the whole endeavor is that the United States has contributed to so many deaths worldwide (both in and out of wars), including so many of its own citizens, that the number becomes ridiculous. I'm hoping that we've reached a period where we no longer overthrow governments or fund separatist groups simply because they serve an interest at the moment.
Should we celebrate his departure? He was largely a symbolic figure, and al Qaeda will run perfectly fine without him. It's more than likely that they will seek retaliation, and the US may just retaliate in kind. So is this a victory? For some, maybe, but for the world, I can't say.