But violence is never enough to create security, and certainly never leads to lasting peace. Violence begets more violence and retribution. So while an appropriate response may include violence it must also include a level of Western, particularly U.S. introspection and at least a sizable portion of active citizens examining what role we played in creating such hatred against our country. It is obvious that the responsibility for Sep 11 rest with those who planned and executed the acts of horror. If the 19 men of Arab heritage had not hijacked the planes and crashed them into the WTC towers the disaster would not have happened. Yet they had reasons for their actions, and to fully address and appropriately respond to the crisis at hand we must delve into, take serious and dare I say, legitimate their reasons. It is crucial to remember that reasons are not excuses. We cannot excuse nor wholly accept these horrid acts of violence as understandable. Anyone who is directly responsible for such acts must be held accountable. But if we wish to move pass the crisis rather than repress it and in the process plant more seeds of hate, we in the United States must have a full and open discussion as to why September 11, 2001 happened.

Unfortunately the dominant socioeconomic paradigm does not allow for a full debate with all the possible spectrum of viewpoints. Those who wish to examine the role of United States’ foreign policy in motivating the September 11th attacks are labeled as traitors and abettors to the enemy.  Critiques of the U.S. are dismissed as attempts to pull America down. It is said that the country needs unity now not discourse. This is a by-product of our unwillingness to be truthful with ourselves about ourselves. Our nation, my country continues to ignore the evils that are a part of our past and present. This will not allow us to acknowledge as a nation our role in the creation of such men who saw and see so little value in U.S. citizens’ lives. We live in our myth of a righteous and pure America rather than in the reality of a human America with human weaknesses, vulnerabilities and frailties. We are taught that good and evil are separate and apart from each other when in fact they live within each of us and many times speak and act through us. This clouding of truth and the entanglement of good and evil are evident in our national response to Sep 11. The first clouding of truth is our shock at such an act of violence. We cannot fathom how someone can plot to kill so many non-combatants thus the "innocent," no matter the grievance. We fail to remember in our myth of good America that our history is replete with the killing of non-combatants thus the "innocent." Examples from our early history are the near genocide of First Nation people and the enslavement of Africans; Nagasaki, Hiroshima and Vietnam from recent history, and Iraq and Serbia in our present.

 Many would argue that these moments in our history are in the dim past and play no role in our present day national character or the near and present day examples are justifiable and do not stain our national virtue. While these arguments have validity they do not wash away the suffering and horrors imposed on the victims of manifest destiny, slavery and war. They also do not recognize the paradox of good and evil present together as one. The escape of the oppressed and persecuted from Europe to the Western hemisphere was an epic and magnificent event. But the new comers systematic ethnic cleansing of native peoples and conquest of a land not entirely theirs was evil. The creation of the United States, the first constitutional republic by what may well be the most important political document in history is a tribute to the human struggle for freedom, and should be heralded and celebrated. But the socioeconomic vehicle of slavery used to cement this union was unholy.

Fast forward to a time not so long ago, remembered by many people living today. Let us examine our heroic role as the arsenal for democracy and the saviors of the free world. My statement is not intended as a cynical description of the U.S. in WW II. United States' citizens can and should hold their heads high as we remember the lives lost and the sacrifices suffered to rid the world of Nazism, Fascism and rampant nationalism. Yet if we are truthful with ourselves our confidence will be tempered and reflective as we also remember Jim Crow, lynching, U.S. anti-Semitism, virulent sexism, Japanese-American internment camps and McCarthyism. The war waged while necessary was not without its "collateral damage." The bombing of Berlin to shambles to break the spirit of the German people surely killed more than the "guilty."  

With the backdrop of the recent enormous loss of civilian life on U.S. soil, one event during this period in our history deserves particular attention. As stated before, we ask, is such horror ever justified? Of course the answer is no. Yet we found justification to drop atomic bombs on two Japanese cities, causing damage well beyond the destruction of several World Trade Center complexes. Estimated deaths caused by the nuclear explosions, 105,000 and 94,000 injured, most if not all-civilian non-combatants, thus “innocents.”

Paul Fussell's 1981 essay, Thank God For The Atomic Bomb discussed among other things, what U. S. soldiers on their way to invade Japan might have been thinking as they neared the islands. It was estimated that Allied casualties would surpass one million to force the Japanese to surrender the home islands Kyushu and Honshu. I do not fault those brave men and women soldiers if they wished a cataclysmic event to befall their enemies, so that they would be sure to return home and see their families again. No I cannot. I felt those same emotions before the U.S. attack on Iraq. I hugged my wife, said goodbye to my son, sisters and mother thinking I may never return home. I counted on the U.S. willingness to use tactical nuclear weapons to stop Saddam from using bio, chemical or nuclear weapons against me. I am familiar with the fear of dying in a foreign land.

Once again good and evil commingling speaks together. It was good that the United States ended WWII, saved American lives and stopped the Japanese slaughter of Chinese. But the use of weapons of mass destruction is a kind of evil.

And then there is the most horrific vision of all. The apocalyptic M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) strategy was the accepted policy to ensure the survival of our way of life and a free world. The United States had in place plans that could have led to the “end of the world as we know it.”  Was world obliteration the appropriate response to first strike Soviet aggression against the United States? Of course the Soviet paranoia and obvious design to control much of Europe and parts of Asia had to be held in check. But world annihilation as an acceptable outcome to ensure Soviet defeat has a ring of madness. The possibility is evil. The deaths at the WTC are insignificant when compared to the deaths of billions.

1    2     3

Declaration of Human Rights United States Constitution Amnesty International USA Green Peace
United Nations US Government

Jan / Feb / Mar 2002