Interesting People mailing list archives

IP: cowardice and strategy


From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 05:12:05 -0400


From: "Gerry Faulhaber" <gerry-faulhaber () home com>
To: <farber () cis upenn edu>
Subject: cowardice and strategy
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 23:14:56 -0400

Dave-- for IP if appropriate

President Bush characterized the attack of 9/11 as a "cowardly" act, and
some have noted that it is not a cowardly act to kill yourself for a cause
you believe in (even if woefully misguided).  Bill Maher was a bit too
"Politically Incorrect" when he pointed this out on his show, and received
much criticism.  In fact, he is correct; the pilots were not cowards; they
were willingly sent to their deaths by others, not unlike the Japanese boys
who flew into US ships at Okinawa in1945 "for the Emperor."

The cowardly act was not the suicide pilots'; the cowardly act was those who
sent them and then refused to identify themselves and their cause.

Few appear to have noticed that no one, no group, has claimed responsibility
for the 9/11 attacks.  If a group had a political purpose, it would announce
itself and its demands: free our political prisoners, stop aiding Israel,
end the blockade of Iraq, whatever.  After all, the point of such an attack
ought to be to achieve an objective, and you can't do that unless the
violence is accompanied by a demand for that objective.  When a Palistinian
youth with a bomb strapped to his body rushes into a crowded Israeli store,
we know what he wants, and why he did what he did.  Even the kidnappers in
Munich 1972 Olympics announced who they were and why they did what they did.

If the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks believe their cause is just, then
identify themselves and announce their cause; let the world judge.

By failing to identify themselves and announce their cause, the perpetrators
are identifying themselves as cowardly killers; their only interest is in
killing people, apparently Americans.  And they are willing to send other,
more gullible, men to their deaths to do so.  We know why the Palistinian
suicide bombers do what they do.  We knew why the Japanese kamikaze pilots
did what they did.  However misguided, they had a cause they were proud to
announce.  Why not the men behind the WTC/Pentagon bombers?

Do they deserve to be hunted down?  Yes.  Do those who support their efforts
deserve our enmity?  Yes.  But above all, what America does needs to be seen
by the rest of the world, particularly the Muslim world (not our enemies) as
*right*.  SpecOps to kill bin Laden & Company must be seen as appropriate
and necessary; carpet bombing of *proven* terrorist camps must be seen as
legitimate.  And financial isolation of regimes providing support to
terrorists must be seen as fully justified.  This requires a level of
intelligence we apparently are now lacking but need desperately.  It also
requires some sharing of that intelligence with others to support our
credibility.  This cannot be used as an opportunity to take out guys we
don't like.  It must be tightly and visibly tied to defeating terrorism and
responding to the threat we now confront.  "Settling old scores" is a wildly
bad strategy.

If we are defending civilization, as President Bush asserted, then we must
be civilized ourselves, even when we fight a war.  Nothing could be more
difficult, and we have had our failures in this regard in wars past.  But
being strong and effective does not mean being barbaric and indiscriminate.

There was only one thing President Bush neglected to mention in his very
strong speech: we need to be ready for casualties, maybe lots of them.  This
is a war; soldiers die.  There will be lots more than 6,333 deaths in this
war; we need to be ready for this.  This is the time America is to be
tested; let's pray our leaders are up to it; I know our people are.

Gerald Faulhaber
Business and Public Policy Department
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Philadephia, PA 19104
215-898-7860



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/


Current thread: