Picasso's "Guernica", in response to the first aerial bombings, 1937 |
Jesus
All of us were sickened recently to learn about videos of enemies so evil as to decapitate two people in an act of revenge for U.S. bombings in Iraq.One U.S. response has been to launch yet more air attacks against ISIS (or ISIL) in return for these and other acts of genocide against Christians, Yazidis and Shiah Muslims in Iraq. Violence, as always, just keeps on engendering more and ever worse violence.
Take aerial bombing, for example.
Victims taking a direct hit are instantly obliterated into unrecognizable bits of bone, blood, brains and other body parts, though not subject to prolonged suffering. Others experience sure and unimaginably agonizing deaths from untreatable burns and other wounds. Still others may survive but be left with injuries from which they will never recover, suffer severe lacerations and loss of limbs, and endure lifelong psychological traumas
Which act of terrorism should we consider worse, when each is unspeakably despicable?
Sadly, drone and aerial strikes have become accepted as antiseptic and routine, the equivalent of just another hit in a video game, although nothing could be further from reality.
One reality being that one day all perpetrators of any acts of barbaric brutality will surely have to give an account.
It would seem to me that one could obviously consider the motivation and reason for the action in each case. Hell as described in the scriptures will be a barbarically brutal place to be.
ReplyDeleteI'm looking here at "morality" in terms of the actual physical and psychological effect on the victim. I'm told, for example, that we dropped more firepower on Vietnam and surrounding countries than we had in all of WWII, but I'm sure the pilots who delivered their deadly loads probably had no evil or vengeful intent whatsoever, were simply carrying out their "mission" then returning to base to enjoy a cold beer and watch a movie. But can we judge the morality or the heinous nature of something solely on what's in the heart of the perpetrator? Or does killing or maiming without any passion or sense of "mission" make the act all the more chilling and evil?
Delete