Nukes, Terrorists, Hearts of Darkness

The previous entry might make you think I’m a foe of “the war against terrorism.” Untrue. Yes, I think the invasion of Iraq was a complete and total muck up, but I also think the war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda was justified, necessary, and even moral . . . or, anyway, as moral as war can be. Nations and governments have an obligation to defend their citizens when they are attacked.

Indeed, in the shadowy recesses of my dark heart, I have sometimes wondered if it wouldn’t have been better if we’d taken the affair nuclear right after 9-11 . . . say, toss a few sub-kiloton devices at the Al Qaeda camps, which tended to be fairly remote. Non-combatant deaths would have been minimal, and more importantly, the world would have been given notice that anyone contemplating the mass murder of Americans (and, further, citizens of any Western nation) faced instant and total obliteration.

Of course, afterwards, the United States would have been roundly denounced for its actions. But, come. Let us be frank. What difference would that make? Right after 9-11, and long before Geo-W’s ill-conceived invasion of Iraq, a glance at the editorial pages of newspapers around the world . . . even in Western Europe, even in the English-speaking world . . . revealed that the opinion of a whole lot of Heavy Thinkers was that the ole US of A had dang well got what it deserved, thank-you-very-much, and that we, as a culture, should respond to the slaughter of our people by dropping our collective pants and saying, “Please, Sir, may I have another?”

The point being that we could curry the favor of the People Who Know Best the world over . . . or we could just bash ourselves in the head a few times with a 2x4. It would achieve just about as much, and be a whole lot quicker.