Raqqa, Syria: Liberation Through Obliteration

How is this kind of massive bombing not an act of terror and genocide?

To most western observers, finally freeing Raqqa from ISIS control is unmitigated good news, a victory worthy of great celebration.

But at what cost? And who pays?

According to an AP report in today's paper, 80% of this once prosperous city along the Euphrates (about the size of Richmond) is no longer habitable. Hundreds of civilians have been killed or maimed for life by massive bombing and drone strikes that have decimated the population and rendered those who survived homeless and with little hope for their future.

So what constitutes a military success? Have we completely lost our moral bearings and our credibility as a nation that supports human rights for all, including the inherent right to life itself? In the interest of achieving victory at any price, do we justify any and every means of achieving it? A nuclear strike? Chemical warfare?

It's just not possible, in my mind, to make any meaningful moral distinction between the terrible atrocities committed by ISIS and the equally unthinkable terror caused by massive bombing raids.

According to today's article, "Associated Press drone footage taken Thursday showed bombed-out shells of buildings and heaps of concrete slabs piled on streets littered with destroyed cars. Entire neighborhoods were turned to rubble, with no sign of civilian life--testimony to the thousands of bombs dropped on the city mainly by U.S. warplanes."

Someday history will judge us for condoning this form of holocaust. 

May God have mercy on us all.