Analogous Story
Note: I wrote this in January of 2010. I updated it slightly for today's post.
Here's a hypothetical story.
Disclaimer: I did not have any particular person in mind, it is
completely made up. Any similarity to any living person is purely
coincidental.
A man kills another man in a violent
act of cold blooded murder.
The murdered man had an affair with the
murderers wife.
The murdered man has a history of promiscuous
relationships with married women.
The murderer is known to be a guy
with a bad temper and tendency towards violence and even being
abusive to his wife.
Who is guilty of the crime here? The
murderer of course. He should be convicted and tried and subject to
the highest form of punishment for his act. In deed, there is not
much to like about this guy and perhaps even his wife will now be
better off if he is put in jail and kept away from her.
Could the murder have been avoided?
Most definitely. If the murdered guy had not had an affair with this
particular women, he would not have been murdered by the woman's
husband. But that's not to say that he wouldn't have encountered
another man who might have reacted similarly. The problem is this
guy's life style. He needed to stop being promiscuous and that would
give him the greatest chance to avoid harmful conflict with another
angry man in the future.
By pointing out the moral flaws of the
murdered man are we saying that it is his fault that he was murdered?
No, not at all. And to suggests that the murderer is not to blame for
such a terrible act because the murdered man was the cause would be
simply outrageous and totally unacceptable as well as completely
un-just.
Application
Now let's apply this story in an
analogous way to the 9/11 attacks and US foreign policy.
The terrorist acts of 9/11 were
terrible and inhuman acts of violence against civilians. They were
despicable deeds which should be punished. All who planned and
participated in them should be found and brought to justice. But what
was the motive and why did this small group of men do these terrible
things?
Osama Bin Laden and the 9/11 attackers
have stated the following as the primary reasons for making war on
the US:
- US Position against Muslims in
Palestine (support for Israel).
- Occupation of the Land of the Two Holy
Sanctuaries (Islamic holy land).
- US actions in Iraq. Pre 9/11 this would
have been enforcement of a blockade and no-fly zones where thousands of civilians
were killed by starvation and aerial bombing.
- US support for tyrannical governments
in: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and other middle eastern Gulf States.
By taking note of these positions, does
it mean that we are saying it is our fault that the 9/11 attacks
occurred? Not at all. Like the story I made up, this gives no excuse
what so ever for doing such a heinous act against innocent civilians.
Analysis of motive has no bearing on the guilty party in the crime.
The perpetrators of the attacks and all who helped or planned the
attacks should be hunted down and brought to justice.
But it is important to note that our
politicians and leaders are unwilling to acknowledge these reasons as
being the primary motives. In fact, they are giving misleading
motives to the attackers. For example, statements are made such as,
"They hate us for our freedom." Why would politicians do
this? What would they gain by having these misleading motives
accepted by the general public?
The founders of our country were
against interventionism. They wanted free and open relations with
all. They believed in a military for the purpose of defending the
country. By pointing out the motives of the 9/11 attackers and other
terrorists acts against this country I hope to ignite a strong
reaction against our meddling in the affairs of other countries. Our
results in these interventions are extremely poor. We seldom get what
we are seeking by doing it. We are better off not being the policeman
of the world. We are better off setting a good example for other
countries to follow. While I don't excuse the 9/11 attackers for what
they did, it is safe to say that if we did not have military bases in
the middle east, and if we were not propping up repressive
dictatorships, and if we did not give unquestioning support to
Israel, we very likely could have avoided 9/11 all together.
Let's
get a grip on foreign policy by going back to the golden rule. How
do we want other nations to treat us? Let's start treating them the
same way!
Counter argument: it doesn't matter
what they say or what their motive was, they are Islamic extremest.
Everyone knows that Islam is all about killing infidels and eternal
rewards for engaging in Jihad. We should wipe these guys off the face
of the earth.
This is basically a statement of a
genocidal policy. I personally am not comfortable with it. I have
more faith in the Gospel message to change and transform the Islamic
world. I don't see a need to be an agent of judgment and I as a
Christian am not called to such a mission. I would not vote for any
politician who articulated this kind of mission or thought.
Would
you?
Update: related content
Many conservative Christians will offer
up the Quran as a fundamentally violent primary scripture of the
Islamic faith. I am not an expert on the Quron but I believe it is
important to listen to people who have experience with Islam and know
the language. One such person is Professor Juan Cole.
Here he provides counter examples of passages in the Quran for those who
characterize Islam and the Quran as violent.