Insanity of War

Oklahoma Senator Jim Imhofe has guaranteed himself a spot on the news by making a patently absurd comment about the abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib: "You know, they're not there for traffic violations." Now, as a self-proclaimed "extreme right-wing radical conservative," Senator Imhofe no doubt believes that everyone American police arrest here are automatically guilty as well. Most others recognize, as do senators of both parties, that some in Abu Ghraib were falsely imprisoned. Hearing Senator Imhofe's comments make me want to disown the state in which I was born.

The recent murder of Nick Berg will most likely add fuel to Sen. Imhofe's righteous indignation. No doubt, Sen. Imhofe will view this video of proof that we battle barbarians, who must be destroyed utterly. Take, for example, this well-reasoned essay in the National Review. No doubt Sen. Imhofe will call for us to bomb them all.

Continuing with the Berg story, there's a new twist on blaming the victim:

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Berg was in Iraq "of his own accord" and had been advised to leave Iraq but refused. The official refused to elaborate but promised more information later Wednesday. [CNN on-line]

Happily, his father has been brave enough to offer another version of that story:

According to his family, Berg, a small telecommunications business owner, spoke to his parents on March 24 and told them he would return home on March 30. But he was detained by Iraqi police at a checkpoint in Mosul on March 24.

Berg was turned over to U.S. officials and detained for 13 days. His father, Michael, said his son wasn't allowed to make phone calls or contact a lawyer. On April 5, the Bergs filed suit in federal court in Philadelphia, contending that their son was being held illegally by the U.S. military. The next day Berg was released. He told his parents he hadn't been mistreated. His family last heard from him April 9 but it was unclear when and where he was abducted. [same article]

To connect these two stories, the "eye for an eye" morality cited by Mr. Berg's killers is no different from Imhofe's contention that the Al Ghraib prisoners got what they deserved because they're terrorists. If there is a difference, it is only by degree. Both incidents simply prove that humans are capable of inflicting untold abuse on their fellow creatures. Not exactly a major headline.

I believe it was Gandhi who originally said that an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth would eventually leave us hungry and blind. I pray people will not see this murder as a justification for our presence in Iraq, or for increased military retaliation.

The situation in that beleaguered country gets exponentially worse with each week, to the point that the VietNam analogy no longer holds. By which I mean to say that the situation seems to be getting worse faster than it did in 'Nam. For example, revelations about the Mai Lai massacre did not become public until sometime in the '70s — by which point, America had been involved in VietNam since sometime in the late 50s. The revelations about prisoner abuse are being made a little over one year after the "end of major conflict."