Jun 20 2006
The Missing Soldiers: The reactions
I want to say coming out of the chute on this that I am very heartsick for the families of the latest two soldiers killed in Iraq. I won’t dwell on their brutal deaths, enough other people are doing that. What I am concerned about is the reactions.
There are a lot of conflicting emotions that people are going thorugh on this. I have seen reactions from the simple heartfelt comments of a friend of mine in my comments to the blistering calls for retaliation I read in another blogger’s trackbacks. Obviously I consider one a bit more appropriate then the other.
As another of my commentors has said noted, this kind of brutality thing tends to inflame even the pacifist into action.
But it does once again illustrate just how differently we and the terrorists see conflict. Our goal is to have the terrorists stop, either by capture (preferred) or death (acceptable). There goal is just for us to die. There is no effort made to capture the enemy (us) and hold us in camps, our people, whether contractors, soldiers or reporters are just slaughter victims.
Let’s also be clear, and this is brutal but true: In the end death is death, and it is normally pointless to debate the moral superiority the method. In other words, asking "Was it more humane to drop a bomb on Zarqawi’s head then it was for them to behead these two soldiers?" leads us into a kind of moral relevency that has no practical benefit. And even if we did make that comparison, and if we all agree they are cruelanimals, I don’t feel comfortable suggesting we can take the gloves off now and nuke Mecca, or to make Gitmo into a killing field.
Part of my beliefs aer that we do as a rule hold our actions to a higher standard.




