War means murdering the innocent.

Arthur Silber is as bewildered by pro-war advocates as I am:

I don’t know what to say any longer when I come across statements of this kind. In other words: there still might be a result that could make the slaughter of hundreds of thousands “worth it.” In the end, it does not matter that we attacked a country that had not attacked us, and that did not threaten us. Our criminal acts have no ultimate significance. If the end is a “success” — in our terms, even though those terms have nothing whatsoever to do with the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis we have murdered — then all those deaths need not concern us further.

For most people, the five-year-old Iraqi girl has no reality. Nor do her parents, or the other members of her family, or all the countless other Iraqis whose lives have been devastated and altered forever by what we have done.

That could very well be true. Perhaps these people justify their extreme immorality by simply ignoring the hurt caused by their actions. They wouldn’t be the first, or the last. Perhaps they justify it by “the end justifies the means.” Once again, they wouldn’t be the first.

Doesn’t make them any less corrupt.

3 thoughts on “War means murdering the innocent.

  1. kentmcmanigal February 12, 2008 at 15:21

    Maybe I hurt too much for innocent people. I mean, if some cop was raping a woman and a passerby had to kill him to stop the assault, I am not gonna weep for the attacker. But if the passerby then went to the cop’s house to kill his family, I would certainly not think that was right. In my mind, this is what “war” is, especially in the current situations.

  2. Matt February 12, 2008 at 15:21

    “Doesn’t make them any less corrupt.”

    Or culpable.

    Good post Franc.


  3. Francois Tremblay February 12, 2008 at 15:22

    What the… this post was not supposed to appear this early. Oh well.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: