Bush Has
Perverted Our Just Cause Into a Dishonorable, Immoral and Cowardly
Slow-Motion Slaughter of Innocents
November 3, 2001
Our use of military force to
overthrow the Taliban would be just.
But instead, the Bush
administration is crucifying a civilian population in order to keep our
professional soldiers out of harm's way. That's dishonorable, immoral
and cowardly.
Only High Altitude Bombing
We won't let our airmen get
close enough to the enemy to adequately identify what they are
bombing.
Instead, we keep them at
30,000 feet, beyond the range of any Taliban weapon, even though we know
that many civilians will be killed by such a method of bombing because of
known and consistent imperfections in the technology.
No Ground Troops
Afghanistan is on the verge
of mass starvation. Our bombing has prompted an ever-growing exodus of
refugees, also at risk from lack of food and medical care. Continued
warfare will prevent aid from reaching those who desperately need it.
Only a quick end to the war will allow these people to be saved.
Yet we are unwilling to use
our ground troops, who would win the war quickly and decisively.
Kabul is defended by just six
to eight thousand Taliban fighters with 20 year old weapons and absolutely
no air cover. They are located on a wide open plain north of the
city. We could easily amass enough U.S. soldiers and close-in air
support to quickly destroy them and take the capital.
Soldiers engaged in direct
combat on the ground could get hurt, however, so our leaders won't let them
fight.
Even now, hunger and disease
have begun to kill off the civilian population. Because we fail to
prosecute the war with the means readily available to us, the likelihood of
a famine which will kill millions this winter grows ever more certain.
Plausible Deniability
Richard Nixon utilized a
tactic he called "plausible deniability." He would take
actions that most observers assumed were his doing, but Nixon would create
just enough of a "cover" so he could deny responsibility with a
straight face.
The Bush administration has a
policy of plausible deniability with respect to its war against the Afghan
population.
We're not directly
"targeting" civilians, it claims. Seemingly true as narrowly
construed, but in reality we've chosen a bombing method that we know to a
certainty will kill many civilians, and terrorize the rest. So in
effect, civilians are being targeted because they are within the
known error range of the weapons we have chosen to use, instead of the more
accurate low altitude bombing available to us.
It isn't out to starve them,
the Bush administration claims, because it's dropping the Afghans
food. Of course, the food represents less than 1% of the need, and we
refuse to even temporarily halt the bombing to allow truck convoys in, which
is the only way, according to all aid groups, to prevent millions of famine
deaths this winter. Not to mention the fact that we're waging the war
in slow-motion fashion -- e.g., it was three weeks before we even started
bombing Taliban front-line troops -- thus prolonging the agony of the
civilian population and guaranteeing the conflict extends into the harsh
Afghan winter.
A War Against the Afghan People
We are waging war
against the Afghan people. We're doing it subtly, with plausible
deniability, but we're doing it nevertheless.
We accuse the Taliban of
using civilians as shields. We should look in the mirror. We're
willing to kill civilians by bombs and starvation in order to keep our
soldiers 100% out of harm's way.
In moral terms, the life of
an Afghan child, old man or woman is worth no less than the life of a 19
year old American soldier.
For those of a religious
persuasion: does God care more about the American soldier than the Afghan
child?
How could it be a just war
when scores if not hundreds of civilians die from our bombs, and not one of
our soldiers? When we're willing to cause mass starvation to avoid
putting our ground troops in harm's way?
Our troops are undeniably
brave and willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country. It
is their leaders who are at fault. I am certain that if you asked our
troops, they would rather go in and directly fight and win the battle
quickly and decisively.
I don't want any
American casualties. But basic decency demands that such a goal not be
achieved by sacrificing innocent civilians.
The Army Field Manual
provides that commandos behind enemy lines can not execute prisoners, even
if necessary to save their own lives.
We shouldn't be "pulling
the trigger" either against a defenseless Afghan civilian population
which is effectively a prisoner to our high-tech warfare capability.
We shouldn't be willing to
blow up women and children, and starve millions of innocent people, in order
to keep our soldiers out of harm's way.
Such a course of action is
dishonorable, immoral and cowardly.
Let Our Soldiers Be Soldiers! |
