To Kill For

There's too many of them.
I can't kill the world
--Night of the Hunter (1955)
___________

Which is more pure? To kill for love, or for hate? Or not to kill at all?

Since Ranger's Chaplin's chit hasn't been signed in a while, he won't explore the option of conscientious objection. We will go with the American view of Jesus, a savior who sanctions killing infidels who snarl in our direction. We go after them with our God-sanctioned Just War fighters. Their purpose is to kill whatever rings our bells at the moment

As a society, we thrill at the successes and the entertainment value of the killing. Where the reality show and the killing intersect is a place called the Pentagon -- the Hollywood of War ©.

When we kill for love we call it patriotism, loyalty and dedication to country. Our oath to kill is seen as a holy imperative, sanctioned by churches, communities and the Constitution. We are sworn to uphold democracy by imposing our wills and violence upon other men.

Ranger thinks Montesquieu, Rousseau and other Enlightenment thinkers would have a hard time reconciling the concept of acceptable state-sponsored violence being the tool to defeat non-acceptable state-sponsored violence. Whether death is dealt by the State or terrorists, one is still dead, and Thou Shalt Not Kill. This is not a Good Thing, as Martha Stewart might say. Violence, regardless of the source, is not legitimate.

The U.S. kills Taliban because they violate and ignore human rights, without realizing that this response is in itself a violation of human rights. Such response threatens the integrity of all human-based social systems. All law is based upon the presumption that killing is not legally sanctioned, save in the most dire situations. Certainly, killing should not be a spectator sport or a rallying point. Discretionary wars should not be fought.

When our soldiers kill Taliban this is not a virtue, even is the target was an "evil person". Good never flows from violence, and if we believe it does, then we are not a liberal democarcy. When our policies kill a person, this is a failure of our social contract.

Though adrift, we still cling to the notion that the U.S. is a peace-loving nation. Unfortunately, evidence proves the contrary. Until we as a society recognize the difference between peace and violence, and fully accept our own violence, then we are not centered.

Until then, we live a disingenuous schizophrenic national existence.

Hoodwinked

__________________

As regrettable and senseless as are the murders at Ft. Hood yesterday, we ask: When a Hellfire missile kills 12 innocent people in Afghanistan why are we not equally as indignant and outraged?

Both events can/could have been prevented. Nothing good can be gained by any of these deaths. When this happens in theatre we and they are issued an apology by a public affairs officer over the regrettable loss of life. Yesterday, the American people were told that former president George Bush and wife, and President Obama, were all praying for the victims and their families.

Apologies and prayers are not sufficient, even when presidentially-mandated.