American Terrorists

You awake to the headline “70,000 killed by a new weapon of mass destruction.”  More than 25 times those killed at the world trade center on 9/11.  Horrific.  You read further.  It wasn’t us.  Wasn’t Americans who were killed.  Thank god for that.  But wait, it was Americans who killed the 70,000? How can this be?  Americans killing tens of thousands of civilians, old and young, men, women, boys, girls, infants, indiscriminately?  This can’t be.  You read further.  America, in an effort to end the 14 year war on terror takes a decisive step to terrorize those who terrorize, and their supporters, as well as their communities, their families, their friends and all of those who live and work near them.   ISIS, Al-Qaeda , black robed beheaders, and IED makers, terrorists of all stripes and persuasions, told in no uncertain terms that they and their aggression, their jihad, will not be tolerated.  We will annihilate you!   And if you have any doubts, here is the proof, not only of our resolve, our determination, but of our capability to destroy you.  Surrender or suffer this – we can mass murder better then you.  We can kill 70,000 in a blinding flash of nuclear destruction.  So give it up, now. 

If we could locate the heart and soul of those bent on our destruction, on those terrorists who insist on carrying out  their hellish nightmare of suicide attacks and bombings, would we?  Could we?  What would it take to justify the killing of innocent civilians as we did to end the war with Japan in 1945?

Is there a justification?  Can we, in hindsight continue to say that what we did to end that terrible war was morally justified?  And if we can, then is it not within reason to say that any nation or group that believes their way of life is threatened can take whatever means necessary to protect themselves and their loved ones? 

70,000 were killed when the second atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese city of Nagasaki; a city purported to have little military significance, yet having a civilian population of 250,000.  

Then president of the United States, Harry Truman justified the bombing of Hiroshima, three days earlier saying “The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base.  That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, in so far as possible, the killing of civilians.”  The military base, which resided in a city of 350,000, had approximately 43,000 troops. By some estimates, over 100,000 died.

Truman said nothing about the bombing of Nagasaki.

We are approaching the 70^th anniversary of the only nuclear bombings of civilians in the history of the human race.  We won the war, and so we control the narrative.  And our narrative has been that the massive destruction to civilians was necessary to end that war.  The allied bombing of the German city of Dresden and the fire bombing of Tokyo that preceded the nuclear attacks might suggest that the precedent was already in place to terrorize civilian populations to win the war.  Only the method and the magnitude of this intention were advanced by the use of atomic weapons.

I am not advocating a massive mei culpa for forgiveness (though I am not opposed to this, either). But I think there is value in reframing our narrative, in looking back and asking how things might have been done differently? Can we reflect on what we did then and ask “is it still within our moral framework now? “ And if the answer is yes, then sadly, I contend that the war on terror will be endless.