Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts

Friday, September 11, 2015

9/11, 14 Years Later

19 folks killed nearly 3,000 other people on September 11, 2001.

They were waging Osama bin Laden's religious war against the United States. 14 years later, Osama bin Laden is dead, and a great many more folks have died in various 'holy wars.'

The victims have been Christians, Muslims, and folks who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Some say that religion causes wars.

Others blame the Muslims, America, or — a perennial favorite — the Jews.

Me? I think people cause wars. It's not that humans are basically bad: a failed species, or God's big blunder. I've talked about original sin and getting a grip before. (February 1, 2015)

A third of a million people fled their homelands this year, heading for Europe. The survivors may or may not find shelter there.1

Protecting and Helping Neighbors


As a Catholic, I'm expected to love God, love my neighbors, see everyone as my neighbor, and treat others as I'd like to be treated. (Matthew 5:43-44, 7:12, 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31; Luke 6:31 10:25-27, 29-37; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1789)

That's why I can't let myself hate terrorists, or anyone else. But "love" isn't "approval," as I've said before. (September 6, 2015; March 15, 2015)

Sometimes loving neighbors means protecting some neighbors from other neighbors. (August 24, 2014)

Humanity may eventually cobble together an international authority "with the necessary competence and power" to end war and settle disputes with justice and mercy. (Catechism, 2308; "Gaudium et Spes," 79)

Meanwhile, we must deal with the world as it is: and help our neighbors.

More of the same:
1 Hundreds of thousands of Syrians, Afghans, Eritreans, Nigerians and Kosovans, and others, are trying to enter Europe. Thousands have died, mostly by drowning in the Mediterranean:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , ,

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Remembering 9/11, Living in a Big World

About 3,000 folks died in attacks on New York City's World Trade Center and the Pentagon on this date, 13 years ago.

The death toll would almost certainly have been higher, if passengers and surviving crew of United Airlines Flight 93 had not attacked their hijackers. They died, probably because the Al Qaeda pilot deliberately flew into the ground.

Depending on their views, folks have commemorated the 9/11 attacks in many ways.

Some have declared that the attacks were justified, because America is a big meany. They usually express the idea in more sophisticated terms, of course.

Others say that Muslims are to blame: all Muslims. Still others take the more sweeping view that all religion is to blame.

I think there is a tiny element of truth in 'all of the above.'

Al Qaeda's leader at the time, Osama bin Laden, almost certainly had sincerely-held religious beliefs: and chose American targets in response to this country's profound lack of fidelity to his brand of Islam.

I like being an American, and am still upset that so many folks were killed by religious fanatics. But I am not going to rant about folks who don't follow my faith: or those who do, and behave badly.

Instead, I'm going to take a look at how some — but happily not all — Americans have reacted to Catholics, Jews, blacks, and other 'threats' to my country.

Burning Crosses



(From Confederate till Death, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
("Ku Klux Klansmen and women at a cross lighting in on November 12th, 2005."
(Wikimedia Commons))

Father James Coyle's execution in 1921 was, by some standards, justified. Hours before his death, he had performed a wedding between a Ku Klux Klan member's son and a Puerto Rican.

I don't see a problem with 'mixed marriages' like that: but I'm about half Irish: and that's almost another topic. (September 5, 2014; November 13, 2008)

Considering this country's anti-Catholic traditions, though, for the most part we've been treated rather well here.


(From From Buz lightning, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
("Branford Clarke illustration in The Ku Klux Klan In Prophecy 1925 by Bishop Alma White published by the Pillar of Fire Church in Zarephath, NJ"
(Wikimedia Commons))

Living in a Big World


Members of the Ku Klux Klan aren't, of course, the only folks in America who feel threatened by those who the 'right' sort. But over the generations, they've been among the more prominent advocates of 'old fashioned values' in this country. They're also among the reasons I don't miss the 'good old days.' (February 12, 2012)

I think there's wisdom in avoiding hasty generalizations.

Maybe it's obvious, but — the KKK doesn't include all American Protestants, not all Catholics commit murder or genocide, and not all Muslims are terrorists. I've been over this, mostly in another blog:
Happily, more folks are realizing that we live in a big world: and that living among folks who aren't all alike is okay.

Anger, Hate, and Love


I gather that Al Qaeda and other violent Islamic groups don't like today's world. I can sympathize with that attitude, in a way. I'm not at all happy about many of the unethical standards accepted by contemporary Western culture.

Unlike some of my fellow-Christians, though: I do not think we should return to values of the 'good old days' before, say, 1965. I remember the 'good old days,' and like I've said before: they weren't. (June 18, 2013)

I certainly do not think that bombing a federal building (1995), or an Olympic park (1996), is a reasonable response to America's unresolved issues. And killing folks at a Sikh gurdwara is wrong on several levels. (August 9, 2012; August 10, 2012)

Even though I am not personally connected with the 9/11 attacks, and 13 years have passed, I am still very unhappy and angry that Al Qaeda deliberately killed so many innocent people.

That said, I must not hate those who committed these acts. I am convinced that what they did was wrong: but hating anyone is also wrong. (December 9, 2010)

I am a Catholic, so I must take what my Lord said seriously. We are all expected to:

Freedom: For Everybody


Finally, here's something I wrote about faith and freedom, three years ago:

Religious Freedom: For Us; For 'Them;' For Everybody


I've discussed 'why the rights of Muslims matter to this Catholic' before. Aside from thinking that 'my end of the boat isn't sinking' isn't a sensible attitude - I have to care about religious freedom. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)

So far, that's not very impressive. Most folks with religious beliefs believe that they should be free to worship as they see fit. In a way, that's what the war on terror is about: Al Qaeda wants to worship they way they see fit, and make everybody else follow their lead.

The Catholic Church is picky about religious freedom. 'Demanding' might be a better term. As a practicing Catholic, I have to believe that religious freedom is important.

Not just for me. For everybody. (Catechism, 2106)
(September 11, 2011)
More of what I think about living in:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Love is Mandatory, 'Like' is Optional: Praying for Peace in Iraq

"1 First of all, then, I ask that supplications, prayers, petitions, and thanksgivings be offered for everyone,

"for kings and for all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and tranquil life in all devotion and dignity. "
(2 Timothy 1-2)
A post on Google Plus (August 25, 2014) let me know about Bishop Saad Sirop Hanna's challenge or request for a half-hour of prayer before the Blessed Sacrament at a particular time today.
The time was 6:00 p.m. Iraq time. Here in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, that's 10:00 a.m. — and there's a Eucharistic adoration chapel about a half-mile north of my home.


(Me, at the Eucharistic adoration chapel in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, this morning.)

It didn't take me 30 minutes to go through both prayers I found: one from the Chaldean Catholic Patriarch of Iraq; the other from Pope Francis. I spent the rest of the time 'praying' in the sense that I thought about what needs to happen: in the world, and in me.

Basically, we need to:
It's like my Lord said:
..."24 The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments.' "
(Matthew 22:40)
Loving my neighbor is mandatory. Liking my neighbor is optional. Approving of what my neighbor does is occasionally impossible: particularly when my neighbor does something I know is wrong.

Loving disapproval isn't the beam-in-my-eye hypocrisy of Matthew 7:1-5, and that's another topic.

I hope and pray that Iraq, and the world, learns how to settle conflicts with reason, justice, and mercy. My guess is that cobbling together a globe-spanning 'Council of Humanity' will take centuries. But I think it will be worth the effort. And that's yet another topic.

More:
Maybe you've had enough of my ideas for now.

If not, here's part of my take on taking 'love of neighbor' seriously:
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

South Sudan: New Nation, Old Trouble

There's trouble in South Sudan: a bit more than what's usual for our world.
  1. "Mediated Political Talks," "Ethnic Divisions," and People
  2. South Sudan: Statements
  3. Hope and Decisions

Trouble in South Sudan

As far as I know, what's happening in South Sudan hasn't been called a war: not officially. Folks are systematically killing each other though, so it's not "peace," either.

What apparently set off this month's conflict was disagreement over who should have won the recent election. That was just the trigger, though. I gather that at least two ethnic groups in South Sudan have been at odds for a long time. That's not unusual, which doesn't make it right.

Maybe it's obvious, but war is not a good thing. People get killed, things get broken. Avoiding war is a good idea. So is working for peace, although it's okay to keep someone else from killing you, and that's almost another topic. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2302-23017)

South Sudan's troubles aren't the sort of thing I enjoy thinking about on Christmas Day. On the other hand, one of my Lord's titles is Prince of Peace - and we've got a mandate to make this a better world. (Catechism, 1928-1942)

I'm not personally involved with anyone in South Sudan, but know about some folks who are:
I think folks in South Sudan need to work out their own way of accepting each other. Meanwhile, many folks there have very serious, immediate needs. That's something we can help with, which is why I included those Caritas International links. No pressure, of course.

I plan to be back Friday morning, discussing an entirely different sort of news.

1. "Mediated Political Talks," "Ethnic Divisions," and People


(From AP, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
"South Sudan crisis: Increased efforts to end bloodshed"
BBC News (December 25, 2013)

"International efforts are intensifying to end the bloodshed in South Sudan, where thousands of people are believed to have died in the past 10 days.

"The UN Security Council is almost doubling the number of peacekeepers to 12,500 in the world's newest state.

"US Secretary of State John Kerry urged both President Salva Kiir and rebel leader Riek Machar to end hostilities and begin mediated political talks.

"The fighting has exposed ethnic divisions in South Sudan.

"Mr Kiir is an ethnic Dinka, while Mr Machar represents the Nuer tribe.

"The violence erupted on 15 December when Mr Kiir accused Mr Machar, who was vice-president until his sacking in July, of plotting a coup.

"Mr Machar denies trying to seize power...."
I think "mediated political talks" are a good idea. I'm also quite sure that political ambition is just part of South Sudan's troubles.

Phrases like "ethnic divisions" may be cliches, but it's a fact human beings aren't all alike. I like it that way, and think diversity is a good idea. That's real diversity, not the 'my way or the highway' version.

Not everybody sees the world that way.

It's easy, in a way, for me to be tolerant. Nobody's trying to kill me because I'm the 'wrong sort.' I probably had kinfolks on both sides of the Lindisfarne incident, but that was a dozen centuries back now, and not quite another topic.

2. South Sudan: Statements


(From FoxNews.com, used w/o permission.)
"UN official says 'absolutely no doubt' thousands dead in South Sudan"
FoxNews.com (December 25, 2013)

"The United Nations' humanitarian coordinator in South Sudan said Tuesday that he had "absolutely no doubt" that thousands of people had been killed in violence that threatens to tear the world's newest country apart a little more than two years after it won independence.

"Toby Lanzer made the remarks quoted by Sky News after U.N. investigators discovered two mass grave in the rebel-held city Bentiu in the oil-rich Unity state. Human rights office spokeswoman Ravina Shamdasani told the Associated Press that one grave contained 14 bodies and a site nearby contained 20 bodies. Originally the U.N. said 75 bodies had been seen but later corrected that statement to 34 bodies seen and 75 people missing and feared dead.

"In New York, the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to beef up its peacekeeping force in South Sudan. It condemned targeted violence against civilians and ethnic communities and called for 'an immediate cessation of hostilities and the immediate opening of a dialogue.'..."
A spokesperson getting statistics wrong in an early statement doesn't surprise me. What's going on in South Sudan isn't a nicely organized ball game, with referees keeping score.

Under the circumstances, I think it's remarkable that the count was correct, and all that needed correcting was to change "dead" to "missing and feared dead."

About the U.N. Security Council's vote, I think it's a good idea. What some diplomats say, thousands of miles away from South Sudan, probably won't make much difference. Still, what they said makes sense: and might encourage enough folks who do make a difference that talking is better than killing.

I'm not a great fan of the United Nations, by the way. But that outfit is the closest thing we've got to Tennyson's 'Parliament of man ... Federation of the world."

Eventually, I hope we will have an "international authority with the necessary competence and power" to stop wars. (Catechism, 2308)

Right now, the United Nations is what we have to work with. For the moment, it will have to do. (June 16, 2011)

3. Hope and Decisions

"South Sudan conflict 'spreading around the country' "
BBC News video (December 24, 2013)

"New evidence is emerging of alleged ethnic killings committed during more than a week of fighting in South Sudan.

"The violence follows a power struggle between President Salva Kiir, a Dinka, and his Nuer ex-deputy Riek Machar.

"The BBC's Africa analyst James Copnall reports."
BBC News is either taking the usual precautions about not jumping to conclusions, or the "alleged" part of "alleged ethnic killings" has to do with motive: not whether or not folks are turning up dead.

Either way, they're dead. I hope enough folks in South Sudan decide that staying alive and making their country work is more important than killing the 'other' people. My ancestors eventually made that decision: so it's not a forlorn hope.

Related posts:
Background:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Sunday, September 11, 2011

The War on Terror: 9/11/2001 - 9/11/2011

9/11/2001-9/11/2011:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , ,

9/11, Just War, and 'Death to Mickey Mouse'

I've said this before: I think war is not nice. Things get broken, and people get killed. I also think that sometimes war is preferable to the alternative.

The first belief doesn't make me a pacifist, the second doesn't make me a warmonger. As if that's not confusing enough, I'm not a conservative or a liberal either. And I'm certainly not "moderate." I'm a Catholic.1

Oh, for the Will-Be that Was

I also think it would be nice if someone could have called 911 back in 2001: after which Osama bin Laden would have been arrested, tried, and kept from causing more trouble.

Or, better yet, that a sorehead with religious quirks would have learned to be an annoyance at the local bar or its equivalent - not the mastermind of the largest mass murder America has seen.

I remember the trailing edge of an era when Progress and Science were expected to solve all our problems. I think that's about as reasonable as the currently-fashionable notion that Progress and Science will kill us all - plus all the cute animals.

The Parliament of Man - - -

One of the overly-optimistic predictions I remember is that the United Nations was that socio-political El Dorado we'd read about in speculative fiction: a wise, benevolent, powerful world government on a par with the Science Council of Krypton. The reality is - much more realistic.

I've quoted Tennyson before:
"...We're a very long way from having an 'international authority with the necessary competence and power' to simply arrest someone like Saddam Hussein. (Catechism, 2308)

"Until we have something like Tennyson's 'Parliament of man, the Federation of the world,' we'll have to make do with the United Nations. Or go back to the 'good old days' that led to the 'war to end all wars' - and the war after that one...."
(June 16, 2011)
This doesn't mean that I "trust" the United Nations. I don't assume that whatever comes out of the U.N. is right. I do think that, along with outfits like the United States Congress and the alleged national government of Somalia, it's what we have to work with.

Moving on.

'What if They Had a War, and Nobody Came?'

I was one of those 'crazy college kids' in the '70s, and had already created a sort of 'peace poster' in high school. It was no more conventional than my attitudes at the time: and that's another topic.

Then, as now, I thought that war is not nice; and that peace is nice. I also thought that we live in a world where not everybody is nice.

Which is why why I have a great deal of respect for serious, dedicated, pacifists: and think that they will prosper as long as there are non-pacifists to protect them.

Living in the Real World

Like it or not, there are times when folks whose chief offense is existing get killed by the world's not-nice people.

When that happens, a decision has to be made by the secular authority responsible for protecting the victims. Over-simplifying the matter, the choices are often:
  • Hope that the not-nice people will decide to start being nice
  • Take measures to prevent them from being not-nice again
Maybe it sounds silly, put that way: but that's the gist of the decision facing an American president 10 years ago today.

Just War: It's Not an Oxymoron

The Catholic Church has been dealing with the real world for almost two millennia. Our basic instructions are pretty simple, like:
When our neighbor is convinced we work for Satan, and has killed some of our other neighbors? That's when those simple instructions get anything but simple.

That's the bad news.

The good news is that the Catholic Church has been collecting and analyzing what some of the world's top minds thought about applying Christian teaching to the real world: for about two thousand years now.

We've got a method for sorting out what to do when a maniac comes roaring over the horizon. Or, as in the case of the 9/11 attack, has already arrived.

When the targets form a large group of people, like a nation, the principles of 'just war' apply. I've been over this before:
"The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
  • "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
  • "all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
  • "there must be serious prospects of success;
  • "the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
"These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the 'just war' doctrine.

"The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2309)
That's a fairly straightforward list of criteria. The trick is applying them in a specific situation. I'm profoundly glad that I'm not one of "those who have responsibility for the common good." I have about as much responsibility as I can handle, being a husband, father, citizen, and some guy with a blog.

Is Defending Ourselves Okay?

I'm a citizen in a country where folks at my level can have a measure of influence in national affairs. And my faith won't let me be 'too heavenly-minded to be any earthly good.' (Catechism, 2246) Which is why I try to figure out what a responsible position would be on issues, and hope I find a candidate with more than a snowball's chance in Hell of supporting those positions, if elected.

I've gone over the idea of 'just war' before, in connection with supporting folks in Libya who'd gotten fed up with the Colonel. (March 22, 2011)

Today, on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attack, I'm doing the same for the war on terror as a whole.

Is the war on terror a 'just war?' Here's my take, point by point:
  • "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;"
    • I'm not sure how many dead people it takes to be "lasting, grave, and certain"
      • The 3,000 or so folks killed September 11, 2011 are a tiny fraction of Earth's population
        • Some think they deserved to be killed2
    • But dead is dead
      • It doesn't get much more "lasting, grave and certain" than that
    • Al Qaeda and other like-minded groups give no sign that they're ready to stop killing folks why don't agree with them
      • This makes them a threat to just about everybody
  • "all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;"
    • This, I think, is a genuinely uncertain point
      • It's possible to say that tomorrow Al Qaeda will have a leader who says it was all a big mistake
        • And start handing out love beads
        • Possible, yes
          • Likely, no
      • Ignoring terrorists, and 'diplomatic solutions,' have been tried
        • Since the '70s3
          • With at-best-limited success
      • Maybe Al Qaeda would stop killing people if an American president
        • Asked very nicely
        • Apologized for letting Americans
          • Drink beer
          • Wear trousers
          • Drive cars
            • Applies to women
          • Be insufficiently Islamic
  • "there must be serious prospects of success;"
    • On one side we've got religious fanatics
      • Who apparently want to keep thing just the way they were
        • At least several centuries back
        • In a sort of ancient backwater
          • Where things hadn't changed much in about 4,000 years4
    • On the other side we've got just about everybody else
      • Those whose ancestors helped make today's world
      • Those whose homelands didn't quite keep up
        • But who see advantages in getting up to speed5
    • The side with 'everybody else' has
      • Economic resources that are
        • Vast
        • Diversified
      • Generations of experience in settling differences
        • Through negotiation
          • Not beheading
        • Through armed force
          • Which encourages negotiation
    • I think 'everybody else' stands a very good chance of succeeding
      • Not swiftly
      • Not easily
      • But eventually
  • "the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition."
    • This, I think, is another uncertain point
    • Not acting without certain knowledge of all possible outcomes sounds nice
      • But probably requires abilities that living human beings do not possess
        • Which reminds me of the nature of knowledge
          • And other topics
      • Divination, by the way, is not an option for a Catholic (Catechism, 2115)
    • I think Iraq is a success story of sorts
      • The American-led coalition6 did some damage
        • But succeeded at least in part because Iraqis noticed who was
          • Helping them
          • Beheading them7
    • I also think that folks will decide getting beheaded by religious fanatics isn't such a good idea, after all
      • After they learn what the 'Satanic' West is really like
So, is the war on terror a "just war?"

I think it is. So far, anyway. Using armed force - carefully - to delay the next massive terrorist attack will continue to be justified. Provided that American leaders and their counterparts elsewhere remember what the stakes are - and why so many Iraqis decided to turn on their 'protectors.'

Armed Force: Necessary, But Not the Whole Solution

I do not think armed force is what will finally end the situation that produced Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Al Shabaab, and all the rest. But I do think it'll be needed to keep terrorists from 'protecting' their victims from freedom, prosperity, and Mickey Mouse cartoons.8

Vengeance, Forgiveness, Justice

Nobody I know was killed in the 9/11 attacks. Many of those who did lose children, parents, relatives, and friends 10 years ago are still hurting. Which is why forgiveness is important.

This is getting me into a topic for another post - but a sort of bottom line is that forgiveness isn't for the sake of whoever wronged me: it's for my benefit.

Also, "forgiving" isn't "excusing." My faith doesn't require me to be stupid. Or mentally blind.

Finally, justice is a virtue. Vengeance is strictly God's business.9

Related posts:
The 10th anniversary of 9/11, more posts:
1 The Catholic Church has been around for about two thousand years. It didn't conform to the standards of the Roman Empire. We're required to follow what our Lord taught us, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, following to the best of our ability the wisdom of the Father.

It's not our business to cater to the preferences of whatever empire or nation is on top of the heap in the century we're in. I've been over this before:
2 I don't think the folks in New York City's World Trade Center deserved to be killed, but I'm not on the same page as the establishment's lunatic fringe.

I also think it's important to remember that the loudest, craziest, members of a group - may not be typical of the group. Not all 'establishment types' in the '60s were commie-hunting maniacs; not everybody who's with the new establishment are liberal nut jobs. Every largish group seems to have its lunatic fringe, though:
3 The 9/11 attack wasn't the first time that Islamic crazies killed 'the enemy.' What makes it stand out is the scale, and that September 11, 2001, is when an American leader decided that firm action was needed.

Victims of terrorism haven't just been Americans:
  • 1972, September 5, Munich Olympic Games. Palestinian terrorists kill 11 Israeli athletes.
  • 1979, November 4, Teheran. Ayatollah Khomeini supporters take over U.S. embassy. Fifty-three U.S. diplomats held hostage until 1981.
  • 1983, April 18, Beirut. Islamic Jihad truck bomb hits U.S. Embassy. 63 dead.
  • 1983, October 23, Beirut. Hezbollah truck bomb hits U.S. Marines barracks. 241 dead.
  • 1984, December 4, Kuwait Airlines. Hijackers divert flight 221 to Tehran. 2 dead.
  • 1985, June 14, TWA flight. Hijackers divert flight 847 to Beirut. 1 dead (U.S. Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem, dumped on the airport tarmac).
  • 1985, October 7, cruise ship Achille Lauro. 69-year-old American Leon Klinghoffer and his wheelchair dumped overboard.
  • 1987, September 5, Pan Am. Abu Nidal hijacks flight 73 in Pakistan. 20 dead.
  • 1988, December 21, Pan Am. Libyan terrorists allegedly blow up flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, 259 dead.
  • 1990, November 5, New York City. A group including Ramzi Yousef kills Jewish Defense League leader Rabbi Meir Kahane
  • 1994, March 1, Brooklyn. Rashid Bas attacks a van transporting yeshiva students. 1 dead.
  • 1996, June 25, Dhahran area, Saudi Arabia. Unknown persons hit Khobar Towers with truck-bomb. 19 dead.
  • 1998, August 7, Kenya, Tanzania. Unknown persons hit U.S. embassies with car bombls. 291 dead.
  • 1993, February 26, New York. An al-Qaeda-financed group including Mohammed Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Mahmud Abouhalima and Ahmad Ajaj, hit the Twin Towers with car bomb. 6 dead. "The blind sheik," Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, masterminded the bombing.
  • 2000, October 12, Yemen. Al-Qaeda may be responsible for attack on USS Cole. 17 dead.
  • 2001, September 11, New York City; Arlington County; Somerset County, Pennsylvania. Al-Qaeda affiliates hijack airliners, destroy Twin Towers, damage Pentagon. Fourth airliner brought down in Somerset County field. 2,974 dead.
    (Source: Newsmax.com and BBC.)
    (Previously posted in Another War-on-Terror Blog (August 5, 2007))
4 I'm an American. As I've explained to my kids, we're a twitchy lot. Some of us pine for the 'good old days,' but for the most part we can't seem to stop trying to make things better. And succeeding a remarkable fraction of the time.

Here in America, a building that's more than a few decades old is - really old. We've got pretty much the same political system we had two centuries back, but we started tweaking it practically from the get-go.

Most folks in the Middle East are descendants of Abram's neighbors - and Abram/Abraham. Abram changed his name to Abraham, was a central figure in a domestic dispute we're still dealing with, and the rest of the world changed.

Somewhere between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Viking Era, the Middle East dropped out of the world's cultural mainstream. And stayed there, until maybe a hundred years ago.

My ancestors had a chance to adapt to the last thousand or so years of change gradually. Most folks in the Middle East are going through a steep learning curve just now:
"...From legal action taken against a 'blasphemous' teddy bear, to outlawing the color red: I think there's evidence that many folks living in places like Sudan and Saudi Arabia are dealing, none too calmly, with a world that they simply don't understand.

Or like.

As I've said before: just a few generations back, many folks had been living in a culture which hadn't changed all that much since the days before Abraham moved out of Ur. Then they were dragged across thousands of years of change, from a culture of burqas and honor killings to a world of bikinis, Budweiser and dog food commercials.

No wonder some went a bit nuts...."
(Another War-on-Terror Blog (October 21, 2010))
I've posted about this before, mostly in another blog:
5 Bear with me, please. This story really does connect with the idea that folks outside the 'civilized world' can be at least as sensible as urban twits.

Decades back, I watched a documentary about folks who had been living in the stone age until very recently: and still were, for the most part. They'd made contact after it became illegal - and socially unacceptable - to simply kill 'natives' and take whatever they'd had.

As a result, they were making a little money by trading access to - I think it was gold - for negotiable currency. The elders, at least, understood the value of money, and enough about how business worked to know that they were being cheated.

Remember: These folks aren't 19th-century 'primitives,' or 'natives.' They're people who weren't involved in the last few thousand years' developments. Their technology and culture may be out of date: but they can learn.

The elders tried taking their case to court: and found out that since their agreement with the outsider was an oral contract, it was their word against his. So they used some of their money to buy a battery-operated camcorder. And recorded their next meeting with the outsider.

Then, when they were shortchanged - again - they went back to court. With the videotaped evidence. And won.

As the elder explained, 'we like our old ways and customs. We also like camcorders.'

6 It's been quite a while since the "diabolical" Bush was "going it alone" in a "unilateral" action against Saddam Hussein. I suspect that's because it was fairly easy to find out just how many nations were involved in that "unilateral action:"
7 The Anbar Awakening was the (comparatively) high-profile instance in Iraq, of a sort of reality check Iraqis had, when 'foreign aggressors' invaded their country. Iraqis are no more 19th-century 'natives' than the folks who like camcorders. (footnote 5 above) It didn't take folks in Iraq long to notice that the 'Satanic' invaders were fixing an infrastructure that Saddam Hussein had neglected: and trying to stop the 'lions of Islam' from beheading their neighbors.

After that, Al Qaeda didn't have quite so much public support.

The same strategy was used in Afghanistan:
8 Saudi Arabia is, sadly, a sort of blooper reel among the world's wealthier nations. It would be funny, except they occasionally kill people:
9 Justice is something we can - and must - handle. It's one of the cardinal virtues. (Catechism, 1805)

Vengeance is strictly off-limits for us:
"Beloved, do not look for revenge but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.' Rather, 'if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.' Do not be conquered by evil but conquer evil with good."
(Romans 12:19-21)

"We know the one who said: 'Vengeance is mine; I will repay,' and again: 'The Lord will judge his people.' It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."
(Hebrews 10:3031)

"The vengeful will suffer the LORD'S vengeance, for he remembers their sins in detail. Forgive your neighbor's injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven. Should a man nourish anger against his fellows and expect healing from the LORD? Should a man refuse mercy to his fellows, yet seek pardon for his own sins? If he who is but flesh cherishes wrath, who will forgive his sins?"
(Sirach 28:1-5)
Posted by 5 comments:
Labels: , , ,

Freedom, 9/11, the War on Terror, and Accepting Differences

I haven't discussed the war on terror much in this blog. That sort of post generally shows up in my (what else?) Another War-on-Terror Blog.

Since today is the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attack, and because I don't think 'religion' is something that a person should keep in a hermetically sealed container, apart from an hour on Sunday, I'm dealing with this 'unspritual' topic.

I've got a 'religious' angle here, but it's not what a person might think it would be.

Nations, Coalitions, and the War on Terror

This isn't the sort of war where one national leader sent a formal declaration of war through proper diplomatic channels to another national leader.

On one side we've got a coalition of various nations. The roster changes from time to time, but America has been an important member rather consistently.

The other side is another coalition, sort of: Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda affiliates are important members; the Taliban's name keeps cropping up; and you've got a broad selection of other more-or-less-well-organized outfits. What they've got in common is that they're Muslims who thing God wants them to kill people who don't agree with them.

Then there's Iran's ayatollahs, who have been running the country since about 1979. Iran isn't all that obviously involved in the war on terror. On the other hand, the nuclear power program that they insist is completely peaceful looks a lot like a nuclear weapons development program - so Iran may become a major factor in this conflict.

Saudi Arabia? I don't know what to think. The House of Saud seems to be having trouble adjusting to a post-Magna-Carta world, so maybe the apparent support of terrorists is more a matter of not knowing what century they're at, than actual cooperation.

There's More at Stake than America

America has a huge stake in whether or not outfits like Al Qaeda succeed. This country has a long, if imperfect, track record for protecting freedom. Anyone who wants to enforce a national dress code, protect women from learning to drive cars, and prohibit alcoholic beverages, will have to deal with the United States sooner or later.

But it's not just 'America against them.' Everybody who isn't keen on having crazy rules imposed - including dress codes with death penalties - has a lot to lose if the likes of Al Qaeda succeed.

I think it's important to remember that many, probably most, of Islamic terrorists' victims are other Muslims. Islam is not some homogenous, monolithic block of bin Laden clones.

I also think it's important to remember that America is supposed to value freedom. Freedom for everybody: not just 'the right sort.'

Religious Freedom: For Us; For 'Them;' For Everybody

I've discussed 'why the rights of Muslims matter to this Catholic' before. Aside from thinking that 'my end of the boat isn't sinking' isn't a sensible attitude - I have to care about religious freedom. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)

So far, that's not very impressive. Most folks with religious beliefs believe that they should be free to worship as they see fit. In a way, that's what the war on terror is about: Al Qaeda wants to worship they way they see fit, and make everybody else follow their lead.

The Catholic Church is picky about religious freedom. 'Demanding' might be a better term. As a practicing Catholic, I have to believe that religious freedom is important.

Not just for me. For everybody. (Catechism, 2106)

What can I say? The Catholic Church has quite a few rules - and that's one of them.

Keeping America 'Safe' From Newcomers

Apart from being bound by what the Church teaches, I'm strongly inclined to 'stick up for' Muslims living in America for a more personal reason.

Quite a lot of what I hear and read about 'those people' sounds a very great deal like what I heard and read about Catholics. I discussed how anti-Catholic rants tied in with my becoming a Catholic before. Which is another topic.

'Trouble' with immigrants is nothing new. Like the fellow said, "ask any Indian." As for me? I don't see folks wanting to break into America as a problem, so much as a ringing endorsement of what a great thing we've got going here.

Besides, I think we all benefit when folks with the get-up-and-go to get up and go to this country arrive with new customs, new ideas, and a new angle on how to make things work.

Okay, so Muslims who arrive in America don't worship the same way I do. I'm a Catholic in a largely Protestant country. Most folks in America don't worship quite the way I do as it is: And I'm sure not going to insist that everybody who isn't just like me pack up and go somewhere else.

That'd be silly. Also wrong, and self-destructive. Like I said, I think America benefits from having lots of variety within our borders.

I see I still haven't gotten to my reasons for thinking that sometimes war is better than the alternative. That'll wait for another post. Besides, I've discussed the idea of a "just war" before.

Related posts:
The 10th anniversary of 9/11, more posts:In the news:
Posted by 2 comments:
Labels: , , , ,

The War on Terror: 10 Years Ago Today

Ten years ago today, more than a dozen people, divided among four teams, hijacked airliners. One team flew into the Pentagon. Another team probably crashed, rather than allow their victims to retake the airliner. The two remaining teams flew their hijacked planes into New York City's World Trade Center.

Murder is Not Nice

The hijackers killed more than 3,000 people, including themselves, that day: mostly in lower Manhattan. I think that was a bad thing to do. The Catholic Church disapproves of murder, suicide, and taking hostages. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258-2269, 2280-2283, 2297-2298)

If you're expecting a rant about 'those fiends' burning in Hell: that's not gonna happen. I have no way of knowing how the hijackers' particular judgments went: and there's that Matthew 7:1-5 thing about not judging others.

War is Not Nice

I've been using the term "war on terror" as a name for the conflict between folks who don't think wearing trousers should be punishable by death, and those who do.1 I didn't make up the term, of course.

I think war is not nice: things get broken; people get killed. I also think that sometimes war is better than the alternative. I'll get back to that in another post.

Related posts:The 10th anniversary of 9/11, more posts:In the news:
1 Depending on where you are, wearing trousers may keep your legs warm, result in a fine, or get you killed:
Posted by 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, August 21, 2011

World Youth Day Madrid, 9/11, and an Imperfect World

Today is the last day of World Youth Day Madrid. It's a huge event: well over a million folks came from around the world.

Maybe it's because I'm an American: big numbers tend to impress me. Particularly when it's a headcount of people who went to the trouble of traveling hundreds or thousands of miles to get together. When the event involves a set of ideals, I think attendance says something about how important the ideals are to the attendees.

However, as the parish priest said this morning, World Youth Day Madrid isn't a 21st century Woodstock. It's about my Lord, Jesus, and the church He founded about two thousand years back. I'll get back to that in another post.

Life, Death, and Getting a Grip

Human life is precious. Sacred. I might not use the word "sacred" on my own authority: but that's what the Church teaches. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258)

When someone goes out of his way to kill thousands of people, I think that's an unhappy thing. When the victims' offense was working and living in a country the killer didn't approve of, I think that's wrong. And a terrible waste.

Almost ten years ago thousands of people died when religious zealots flew airliners into New York City's World Trade Center. Many of them were American citizens, all died because hijackers thought they were striking a blow for their religion.1

I think Al Qaeda may have done more than any preacher to convince some Americans that Islam is a religion of kill-crazed assassins: almost as bad as the Catholic Church. And that's another topic. Topics.2

A reminder of the 9/11 attack showed up at World Youth Day:
"September 11 flag arrives at World Youth Day"
David Kerr, CNA (Catholic News Agency) (August 16, 2011)

"A U.S. flag that has appeared at every World Youth Day over the past decade in remembrance of 9/11 victims has arrived in Madrid.

"The flag originally belonged to the family of a young Catholic woman from Brooklyn who was killed in the 2001 terror attack on the World Trade Center.

" 'This flag was given to the family of Suzanne Geraty,' said Fr. Gerard Sauer, chaplain to the World Youth Day pilgrims from the Brooklyn diocese.

" 'She was a parishioner of mine and I buried her,' he told CNA...."
That article, and an account of a thwarted bombing attempt, reminded me of what Job and Ecclesiastes say in part: good as it is in some ways, this isn't a perfect world.

Pacifists, Warmongers, and Catholics

So, I think human life is sacred, and I'm not happy about the 9/11 attacks. Does that make me a pacifist? Or a war-monger?

No.

I'm a practicing Catholic. I can't be a chauvinistic nationalist who believes world conquest would be a good idea. I can't be a strict pacifist, either: although I think it's possible for a practicing Catholic to let others defend him.

The reason I can't be a pacifist is that I live in a country where, like it or not, I have to decide how to vote at least every two years. (June 29, 2011) That means that I need to consider how the candidates' probable actions in office would - or would not - be consistent with Catholic teaching.

Which does not mean I only vote for Catholics. Dante's virtuous pagans might do. More topics.

Elections, Ethics, and Decisions

I couldn't vote for a candidate who promised to make all Americans join the Catholic Church. Or any other. I also couldn't vote for a candidate who promised to make religion illegal. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)

And, getting back to this post's topic, I have to make an educated guess about how closely a candidate would follow the just war doctrine:
"The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
  • "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
  • "all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
  • "there must be serious prospects of success;
  • "the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
"These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the 'just war' doctrine.

"The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2309)
Interestingly, the same criteria apply when fed-up citizens are considering whether or not to overthrow the government. (2243) No, that's not a recipe for liberation theology: and I don't think the United States is even close to a 'storm the castle' scenario. Yet more topics.

"Necessary Competence and Power" - Not Yet

I don't expect to see a perfect world until after the Last Judgment. Yet again more topics.

I do, though, think humanity could do a better job: even while we're dealing with original sin. I've been over that before:
"...We're a very long way from having an 'international authority with the necessary competence and power' to simply arrest someone like Saddam Hussein. (Catechism, 2308)

"Until we have something like Tennyson's 'Parliament of man, the Federation of the world,' we'll have to make do with the United Nations. Or go back to the 'good old days' that led to the 'war to end all wars' - and the war after that one. (March 22, 2011)..."
(June 16, 2011)
Related posts:In the news:
1 I suppose folks will cling to some odd beliefs about the 9/11 attacks for decades. Like this selection:
  • Airliners used in the 9/11 attack were really guided missiles
    • Because President Bush ordered the attack
  • The World Trade Center towers couldn't possibly have collapsed
    • Because they couldn't have
      • That's why
    • So someone blew blew them up
  • The American military blew a hole in the Pentagon
    • I am not making this up
    • Because some windows near the hole weren't shattered
      • They're blast-resistant
    • And the airliner wasn't there
      • Pay no attention to airliner parts you saw in the news
  • An American jet shot down Flight 93
    • Because someone saw an airplane flying near the crater after the crash
    • The CIA did it
    • A perennial favorite
    (sources: Popular Mechanics, Wikipedia>)
I like conspiracy theories - in stories. But I don't believe that shape-shifting, space-alien lizard men secretly run the world. Even if a newspaper tried to warn Americans, back in 2008.

2 I am a practicing Catholic, and a convert, which may make me a bit more gung-ho about my faith that some. I also take religious freedom - for everybody - very seriously. I have to, because as a Catholic, it's one of the rules. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109) See:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Like it? Pin it, Plus it, - - -

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Visit Brian H.'s profile on Pinterest.

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

  • A 'Saint Brian,' Sort of
    My name is Brian Gill. In keeping with the customs of my culture, the first name is one which my parents chose for me, the last is the name ...
  • Mass Murder in Orlando
    I'd be writing a longer, more detailed, post about this; but still haven't resolved some technical issues. ( May 6, 2016 ; updated M...
  • Blind Mice; Heroism During the 'Batman' Killings
    The London 2012 Olympics start today: but instead of analyzing the significance of a South Korean flag being displayed with a North Korean...
  • Elijah and Pushing a Rock
    10th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2016: 1 Kings 17:17 - 24 Galatians 1:11 - 19 Luke 7:11 - 17 Third Sunday of Easter, 2016 by Deacon L...
  • A Catholic Citizen in America: New Location
    The good news is still that Blogger's changes haven't made images in my posts here unviewable. ( May 6-16, 2016 ) Instead of jumpi...

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America Amoris Laetitia angels animals annulment Annunciation anti-catholicism Antichrist apocalyptic ideas apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority balance and moderation baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs brain Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism change happens charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climate change climatology cloning comets common good common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion Corpus Christi cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Crucifixion Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression designer babies despair detachment devotion discipline disease diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Epiphany Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus fear of the Lord fiction Final Judgment First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geoengineering geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude great commission guest post guilt Haiti Halloween happiness hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception immigrants in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language Last Judgment last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magi magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage martyrs Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance penitence Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth positive law poverty prayer predestination presumption pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quantum entanglement quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance Resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes SETI sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transfiguration Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom universal destination of goods vacation Vatican Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war warp drive theory wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news:

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.