After attending a seminar at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum with Henry Friedlander, I taught my first course on the Holocaust just over two decades ago. I then continued to teach courses on the Holocaust until I retired as a professor of history in 2014. Having read dozens of books on the Holocaust, seen dozens of moviesand documentaries on it, and having talked to Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, including Henry Friedlander, I learned a few things about how and why such a colossal crime against humanity happened.
When I took his seminar, Friedlander, who as a teenager survived Auschwitz, taught us that “You don’t kill the people you hate—you hate the people you kill.” It may seem paradoxical, but this insight is powerful. Normal human beings don’t want to be or become killers. Thankfully, killing isn’t easy, even at a remove. (Drone operators are known to suffer adverse symptoms from witnessing death at a distance.)
Yet, if you’re taught and told that you must kill, the moral, mental, physical, and other burdens of killing may drive you to hate those you are killing. “Look at what you made me do!” the killer thinks. You made me do this—and I hate you for it. Doesn’t matter that you’re a guiltless child, I still hate you.
Photo by Ali Jadallah in Gaza (Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
I wonder about Israeli officials today, those who are in control of the demolition of Gaza. A few must truly hate Hamas, but there are many more, I think, who’d prefer not to be put in the position of ordering (or carrying out) massive bombing raids and ground invasions that result in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Palestinians.
How many in Israel, notably in the Israeli Defense Forces, will come to hate those that they kill? How many will succumb to hate as a matter of survival, a sort of mental coping mechanism?
Honestly, I don’t pretend to understand it all. Catchphrases like “man’s inhumanity to man” or “the banality of evil” seem too easy. I remember reading an interview with Primo Levi, another Holocaust survivor, who related an anecdote about his experience communicating with an unrepentant Nazi in Germany well after World War II. This man wrote to Levi to defend himself; unbeknownst to him, his wife snuck a note into the letter that read:
“When the devil is loose in the village, a few people try to resist and are overcome, many bow their heads, and the majority follow him with enthusiasm.”*
Whether you prefer “devil” or “evil” or “racist extremist” or some other term, history shows how humans readily unleash the most elemental barbarism when they believe they are threatened, especially when the “threat” is dehumanized.
Do we kill those we hate, or do we come to hate those we kill? Regardless of the causality here, the common words “hate” and “kill” tell us that to stop the hating and killing, we must simply stop. Stop killing. Stop hating. Find another way, a better way, a way that is life-affirming.
In teaching the Holocaust, I came across a multi-volume encyclopedia devoted to humanity’s genocides throughout history. Imagine that! An encyclopedia is needed just to document the almost countless times humans have engaged in mass murder against other humans.
Will Gaza (2023) become the latest entry in this devilish encyclopedia?
*Ferdinando Camon, Conversations with Primo Levi, The Marlboro Press, 1989, p. 37.
A grim historical lesson taught by Thucydides, who wrote on the Peloponnesian War more than two millennia ago, is that the strong do what they will while the weak suffer what they must. Historically, the Jewish people have often been weak. Weak in the sense they had no homeland. They had no army. They were, in a word, vulnerable.
Compounding this vulnerability was prejudice. People who are vilified, who are dismissed as untrustworthy, who are defined as “other,” even as “human animals,” are especially vulnerable to the strong because the vilified rarely attract staunch champions or even sympathetic helpers.
Today, the Jewish people remember and commemorate those who helped them, who stood for justice, who were “righteous gentiles,” at places like Yad Vashem.
Armin Wegner, a German who spoke out against the Nazi persecution of Jews, was jailed and tortured. He is counted among the righteous at Yad Vashem.
There’s a famous saying, the gist of which is that all it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. During the Holocaust, far too many people did nothing when confronted by the evils of Nazism, and millions died as a result.
Today, the Jewish people are no longer weak. In Israel they have a homeland protected by powerful armed forces. They have staunch allies, including the world’s premier “superpower,” along with nuclear weapons, perhaps 200 of them, enough to wipe out the nations and peoples in their immediate vicinity.
Again, Israel today is strong. Thus it faces the ethical dilemma of the strong: the ability to kill on a mass scale, an ability too easily justified in the name of “defense.” Will Israel illustrate Thucydides’ maxim of the strong doing what they will and the weak—in this case, the Palestinians—suffering as they must?
The hardline Israeli government appears to see mass violence, mass death, and mass expulsion as the only solution in Gaza.
History is replete with examples of the strong doing what they will while the weak suffer. Yet Israel is exercising overwhelming power against weak and vulnerable people in ways well known to Jews who’ve suffered greatly themselves in a long and tortured past.
Palestinians in Gaza are not collectively guilty of crimes committed by Hamas. They are an entrapped and desperate people. What is to become of them?
Israel knows the value of righteousness, of justice for all, of an abiding love for all life, as reflected in the moral exemplars honored at Yad Vashem.
What Israel needs now is moral heroism. What Gaza needs now is mercy.
Photo by Ali Jadallah in Gaza (anadolu agency via getty images)
Using Terror Attacks as an Excuse to Kill Indiscriminately
In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on America in 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld knew exactly what to do: “go massive.” Al Qaeda’s “shock and awe” attacks were an opportunity for the Bush/Cheney administration not only to strike against “terror” but against Saddam Hussein and Iraq, possibly even Iran, even though those countries had no role in 9/11. Here’s how Rumsfeld put it:
“Hard to get good case [against Iraq]. Need to move swiftly. Near term target needs – go massive – sweep it all up, things related and not.”
Going “massive” had another benefit: it distracted Americans from the colossal failure of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld to keep America safe, to anticipate and prevent the Al Qaeda attacks. Americans rallied around the flag and asked few questions as Congress gave the president a blank check to wage a “global war on terror.”
Something similar is happening in Israel today. The Hamas terror attacks are giving Bibi Netanyahu and the hard right in Israel an opportunity to “go massive,” to “sweep it all up, things related and not.” This has the added virtue of distracting Israelis from the colossal failure of Netanyahu in anticipating and preventing the Hamas attacks. Like their American counterparts, Israelis are tending to rally around the flag as their government is given a blank check (supported by the USA) to wage a war on terror in Gaza.
Of course, a war on terror is a war of terror, which is what we’re witnessing in Gaza. Massive Israeli bombing. Deaths that will soon exceed ten thousand. Widespread hunger, thirst, and suffering. Massive displacement of Palestinians from their homes. All justified because Israel was attacked, and not just attacked but embarrassed, as America was embarrassed on 9/11.
Broadly speaking, the USA and Israel share a conceit of being God’s chosen people and also of having the world’s finest and best military forces. These conceits were challenged respectively by the success of the Al Qaeda and Hamas terror attacks. Embarrassment coupled with anger and revenge leads to going “massive,” irrespective of wisdom or legality (or morality). Going “massive” is also a great CYA exercise, as in covering your ass.
Now is the time, these failed leaders decide, to punish “evildoers,” innocent people be damned. What matters is violence, action, vengeance, settling scores, irrespective of human rights and the so-called rules-based international order. It’s time to kill.
If history doesn’t quite repeat itself, it surely does echo as Israel, much like the USA after 9/11, goes “massive” and kills innocents while claiming it’s all in the cause of self-defense and justice.
Mike Johnson Emerges as America’s God-Chosen Speaker
America has a new House Speaker in Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana. We have something in common: we are both firefighter’s sons. But that’s about all we have in common.
His hand’s on the Bible—trust him!
Speaker Johnson believes that members of the House have been chosen by God to lead. I thought the voters chose them (actually, the oligarchs choose them, but bear with me), but Johnson is an evangelical and a godly man. His wife is godly too; she spent two weeks on her knees in prayer, according to the new Speaker, and I guess her prayers were answered in her husband’s elevation.
Speaker Johnson, besides mentioning the Lord and God repeatedly, repeated the usual platitudes about America: that we’re the “greatest nation in the history of the world,” the “freest,” most powerful one, truly exceptional, with the “best” system of governance. I guess faith really is blind. Indeed, for much of his speech, the House was applauding itself for working so hard and being so devoted to the people.
So how best to show this devotion to America? Speaker Johnson said his first bill would be in support of America’s “dear friend,” Israel! Nothing says “I love America” more than money and weapons for Israel.
Speaker Johnson was at pains to denounce the “barbarism” of Hamas but declared that the actions of Israel in response have been “good.” So it’s good versus evil yet again in the Middle East, with a “strong America” being the brightest “beacon of freedom.”
Yet that beacon dare not shine too brightly because too many “illegal migrants” are seeking to cross America’s “broken border” to the South. Dammit, America is such a godly land that too many people seek to come here and enjoy the bounty given by God to Americans. Thus Congress must act to keep these illegals out. Dim the beacon! Eject the migrants!
Speaker Johnson was at pains to note Americans can’t afford their groceries, their soaring credit card interest rates, and higher mortgages, but again his first bill in the House was not to help struggling Americans but to send more weapons to Israel to kill barbarians in Gaza. In short, he should fit in just fine in leading his fellow swamp creatures to glory.
Invoking the Founders, Johnson talked about the promise of America as a theological creed, but of course the Founders themselves rejected the coupling of religion with state power. They had had enough of state churches with the Anglican Church of England. Speaker Johnson obviously sees himself and his fellow members of Congress as bishops in the Church of America, which isn’t exactly the vision the Founders had in mind when they wrote the U.S. Constitution.
So there you have it. Speaker Johnson is on a mission from God in the greatest and strongest nation in the history of the world. What could possibly go wrong?
Here’s a typical quick summary of the dire situation in Gaza from CNN this AM:
The US is seeking to delay an Israeli ground offensive in Gaza amid calls to free more hostages held there by Hamas and allow aid into the besieged enclave. A senior Israeli official told CNN there will be “no ceasefire” in Gaza, but emphasized efforts are ongoing to free the more than 200 hostages in the region “as quickly as possible.” However, the official added, “humanitarian efforts cannot be allowed to impact the mission to dismantle Hamas.” More than 4,600 people have been killed in Gaza since October 7 and over 14,200 others wounded, the health ministry there said.
Conditions on the ground in Gaza continue to deteriorate as Israel repeatedly bombards the strip with airstrikes.
For “Israeli ground offensive,” substitute massive military assault. Note the mention of hostages held by Hamas but no mention of hostages/prisoners held by Israel. “Besieged enclave”–open-air prison or concentration camp under constant bombing would be more telling. “Dismantle Hamas”: the IDF goal is the total destruction of Hamas, with the death of civilians being blamed on Hamas because “they” allegedly use human shields, i.e. the Israeli government and military is never to blame.
Note the passive voice: 4600 people “have been killed in Gaza” — well, who’s killed them? Who’s wounded 14,200 others? With weapons provided by which countries?
Conditions in Gaza continue to “deteriorate”: What does this mean, specifically? Lack of food, water, power, people dying in hospitals due to lack of supplies, people screaming in agony due to lack of anaesthesia, etc. And why are they “deteriorating”? It’s not just due to airstrikes by Israel. The Israeli government’s decision to stop food, fuel, electricity, and water to Gaza is creating the conditions for death and illness on a massive scale.
Looks like bombs over Gaza today—what can you do? It’s just the weather (Caitlin Johnstone)
Caitlin Johnstone has a fine critique about how Israeli bombing is being reported by the Western press. In essence, it’s reported as if bombs are simply dropping from the sky on Gaza: massive bombing as a very bad hail storm that must be endured and over which humans have no control.
Pay very close attention to how this war is being reported, especially in the Western mainstream press. For we all know the saying that the first casualty of war is truth.
Update: I’m involved with an effort, “Words About War Matter,” and the group led by David Vine has posted guidance for language related to Israel, Hamas, and Gaza. The link is https://www.wordsaboutwar.org/gaza.html.
Why Not Add Medicare for All or Aid for the Unhoused?
President Biden’s “aid”—or, to be honest, weapons packages—for Ukraine and Israel also bundles together other weapons wish lists, or trigger treats, for Taiwan and border security. Here’s a quick summary, courtesy of Heather Cox Richardson:
Today [Friday] the administration asked Congress for a little over $105 billion in funding for national security. The package would devote $61.4 billion to support Ukraine (some of it to replenish U.S. stockpiles after sending weapons to Ukraine); $14.3 billion to Israel for air and missile defense systems; $9.15 billion for humanitarian aid to Ukraine, Gaza, and other places; $7.4 billion for initiatives in the Indo-Pacific; and $14 billion for more agents at the southwestern border, new machines to detect fentanyl, and more courts to process asylum cases.
It’s more than absurd to call these weapons exports “funding for national security.” The United States is not made more secure by funding permanent war in Ukraine or genocide in Gaza; quite the reverse, actually.
Scenes of destruction in Gaza sure make me proud to be an American. Let’s bundle more bombs and missiles for Israel.
Of course, the Biden administration knows there are elements in Congress who are against scores of billions for more war in Ukraine, hence its decision to bundle it with aid to Israel, Taiwan, and border security. It’s a cynical exercise to bundle all these packages together and to demand that Congress vote “yea” or “nay” on the entire bill.
Revealingly, polls show that slightly more than half of Americans are against more weapons shipments to Ukraine and Israel, despite all the propaganda about how killing Russians and Palestinians is vital to U.S. national security. What Americans are in favor of is humanitarian aid, the comfort of warm blankets rather than warm guns. Americans have a lot more sense and compassion than their government.
Speaking of the wonders of bundling, if Congress is so eager to send aid to Israel or perhaps to beef up Taiwan (those “Indo-Pacific initiatives”), let’s bundle a few more proposals into this bill.
How about a $15 or $18 federal minimum wage? Student loan debt forgiveness? A public option for health care or even medicare for all? How about humanitarian aid for America’s unhoused, the people living in tent cities?
Sorry, I don’t believe my “national security” is enhanced by more weapons for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, or even at America’s border with Mexico. Bundling all these weapons packages together, to the tune of $105 billion plus, isn’t just cynical. It’s total bullshit. BS, to be technical.
It makes me almost glad Republicans can’t elect a speaker because you just know most in Congress are eager to enable more killing overseas—in the cause of national security, naturally.
We’re making America a greater democracy one major weapons shipment at a time. Bundling them together is truly the sign of the “indispensable” nation.
The Exceptional Nation Promises More Bullets, Bombs, Guns, and Missiles
In an address to the nation from the Oval Office last night, President Biden promised more trigger treats* for Ukraine and Israel: at least $60 billion for Ukraine and at least $10 billion for Israel in an “aid” package that may reach $100 billion.
President Biden urges Americans to send more weaponry overseas so America’s allies can kill more evildoers. Trigger treats!
Biden repeated several tired cliches about America. That we’re the essential nation, the indispensable one, and also the arsenal of democracy. But maybe what we’re really truly “essential” for is guns and more guns, war and more war?
Biden assured us that sending scores of billions in weaponry was good for America: that those artillery shells and so on that shred Russian and Palestinian bodies are made right here in the USA. They’re job-creators, not body-manglers! Rejoice as America adds more jobs by providing more guns and ammo to Ukraine and Israel.
Biden, like so many in the Pentagon and the U.S. military, resorted to business-speak, explaining that this massive package of “aid” was an “investment” in national security that will pay Americans “dividends” down the road. Actually, all this weaponry will be bought the real American Way, with deficit spending, and the “dividends” will most certainly be more death and destruction and possibly even World War III.
Biden apparently sees only one course for both Ukraine and Israel: total military victory over their opponents. There was no mention of diplomacy, of ceasefires, of negotiation, of compromise. The only way out is through a massive number of dead, full stop.
Biden, who has a bad habit of pointing at the camera, and therefore America, for emphasis, did implore us not to give into hate in its various forms, including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism. Yet it’s not easy to square an anti-hate message with $100 billion in mostly military aid so that Israel and Ukraine can squash and kill all the evildoers in their midst.
Biden, in sum, had a very grim message for America, and therefore for the world, one that embraced war and more killing as “essential” and “indispensable” because that’s the only course one can take when confronted by “pure, unadulterated evil.” And, anyway, war creates good-paying jobs in America. Trigger treats for all!
*I took the idea of “trigger treats” from a local gun shop that is displaying a sign for Halloween that reads “No tricks just trigger treats.”
1. Killing civilians and especially children is wrong.
2. Cutting off water, food, electricity, and fuel to millions of vulnerable people is wrong.
3. Forced mass evacuations of hundreds of thousands of people in preparation for a destructive invasion is wrong.
4. Dropping thousands of bombs and killing thousands of innocents is wrong. So is launching hundreds of unguided rockets and killing scores of innocents.
5. Holding hostages and threatening to slay them is wrong.
Whether Hamas or Israel are doing these things, they are wrong. Putting an end to such wrongs through a ceasefire is right. Certainly, it’s less wrong.
In going to Israel and embracing Netanyahu, President Biden is obviously choosing one side, that of Israel, and empowering it to do whatever it wants in Gaza. Interestingly, Biden claimed that yesterday’s destruction of a hospital in Gaza was done in his words by the “other team,” meaning Hamas.
The terminology here is striking. Israel and Hamas are not sports “teams” in which we choose to root for one side against the other. Israelis and Palestinians are people equally deserving of human dignity and human rights.
I’ve written about the invasion (so to speak) of war terms into sports and vice-versa. Biden’s dismissal of Hamas as the “other team” that’s allegedly responsible for the hospital’s destruction and the deaths of hundreds of innocents trivializes a deep human tragedy.
Are we ever going to move beyond this “team” mentality where we root for the total victory of one “team” over another?
Remarkably, the press secretary of the Biden administration stated that calls for deescalation of conflict in Gaza, calls for restraint, calls for a ceasefire, are “disgraceful” and “repugnant.” There are not two sides to the conflict, the press secretary said. There’s only the Israeli side of righteousness. And Israel must be given a blank check, as well as plenty of U.S. weaponry, to strike back. And so Israel has, dropping 6000 bombs in six days. Obviously, Israel had a prepared list of targets; you don’t drop one thousand bombs a day on Gaza in “precision” strikes without being long prepared to do so.
Meanwhile, President Joe Biden said he had seen photos of Hamas attackers beheading Israeli babies. No such photos exist. Indeed, the initial claim of Hamas beheading babies was false, a frontline rumor that was debunked by the reporter who put it out there.
By recklessly repeating an unsubstantiated battlefield rumor of heinous atrocities and inventing “photos” to support it, President Biden demonstrated his complete lack of fitness to serve as president.
Think about it. In what world is it acceptable for America’s president to claim he’d seen actual photos of beheadings of babies when no such photos exist? How could the president be so recklessly confused, assuming it was simply confusion?
As far as I know, the only candidate for the presidency in 2024 who’s acquitted himself with dignity is Cornel West. West actually accepts that Palestinian babies and children are just as precious and worthy of life as their Israeli counterparts. Every other “name” candidate, e.g. Marianne Williamson and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as well as all the Republicans, are at pains to support Israel without reservation or qualification.
Indeed, far more debate is allowed in Israel about the actions of the government there than is allowed in the U.S. mainstream media and in Congress. Congress is far more obedient to Netanyahu than the Knesset. Perhaps he should be nominated as the new House Speaker? He’d win in a landslide.
Of course, I deplore the Hamas attacks and the deaths of innocent Israelis, just as I deplore the deaths of innocent Palestinians caught in the reprisal bombings. It’s horrible when innocent people die. Isn’t this how any normal and sane human being would feel? Shouldn’t we all unite in calling for a ceasefire, an end to the killing, and some kind of way forward that doesn’t end in mass death and the total destruction of Gaza?
I read today that Israel has already dropped 6000 bombs on Gaza in six days. Here’s the report from the Wall Street Journal:
The Israeli Air Force said it has dropped about 6,000 bombs targeted at Hamas in Gaza since the war began, adding that it will continue the campaign as long as necessary. The airstrikes killed hundreds of Hamas militants and damaged the group’s military infrastructure, the Israeli Air Force said in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.
The Israeli airstrikes caused extensive damage in several neighborhoods in Gaza, killing more than 1,500 Palestinians, nearly half of whom were women and children, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health in Gaza. More than 1,300 Israelis have died since the Hamas assault began.
In 2019, I wrote an article for TomDispatch on the dark side of airpower. Included within were ten cautionary tenets about the use of airpower, with its illusion of “surgical” and “precision” strikes and the way video footage of the same obscures the deaths of innocents. Below are those tenets, unchanged from 2019.
More bombs will be dropped on Gaza in the coming days and weeks. I’m sure Israel will claim, just as U.S. military officials typically have in other wars, that those bombs mainly killed terrorists and other evildoers and that “collateral damage” (all those dead women and children and other innocents), though regrettable, has been limited. And so it goes.
Bomb crater in the Gaza Strip. We see damage to buildings and infrastructure but rarely do we see dead bodies. (Naaman Omar/Zuma Press)
Ten Cautionary Tenets About Air Power (2019)
1. Just because U.S. warplanes and drones can strike almost anywhere on the globe with relative impunity doesn’t mean that they should. Given the history of air power since World War II, ease of access should never be mistaken for efficacious results.
2. Bombing alone will never be the key to victory. If that were true, the U.S. would have easily won in Korea and Vietnam, as well as in Afghanistan and Iraq. American air power pulverized both North Korea and Vietnam (not to speak of neighboring Laos and Cambodia), yet the Korean War ended in a stalemate and the Vietnam War in defeat. (It tells you the world about such thinking that air power enthusiasts, reconsidering the Vietnam debacle, tend to argue the U.S. should have bombed even more — lots more.) Despite total air supremacy, the recent Iraq War was a disaster even as the Afghan War staggers on into its 18th catastrophic year.
3. No matter how much it’s advertised as “precise,” “discriminate,” and “measured,” bombing (or using missiles like the Tomahawk) rarely is. The deaths of innocents are guaranteed. Air power and those deaths are joined at the hip, while such killings only generate anger and blowback, thereby prolonging the wars they are meant to end.
Consider, for instance, the “decapitation” strikes launched against Iraqi autocrat Saddam Hussein and his top officials in the opening moments of the Bush administration’s invasion of 2003. Despite the hype about that being the beginning of the most precise air campaign in all of history, 50 of those attacks, supposedly based on the best intelligence around, failed to take out Saddam or a single one of his targeted officials. They did, however, cause “dozens” of civilian deaths. Think of it as a monstrous repeat of the precision air attacks launched on Belgrade in 1999 against Slobodan Milosevic and his regime that hit the Chinese embassy instead, killing three journalists.
Here, then, is the question of the day: Why is it that, despite all the “precision” talk about it, air power so regularly proves at best a blunt instrument of destruction? As a start, intelligence is often faulty. Then bombs and missiles, even “smart” ones, do go astray. And even when U.S. forces actually kill high-value targets (HVTs), there are always more HVTs out there. A paradox emerges from almost 18 years of the war on terror: the imprecision of air power only leads to repetitious cycles of violence and, even when air strikes prove precise, there always turn out to be fresh targets, fresh terrorists, fresh insurgents to strike.
4. Using air power to send political messages about resolve or seriousness rarely works. If it did, the U.S. would have swept to victory in Vietnam. In Lyndon Johnson’s presidency, for instance, Operation Rolling Thunder (1965-1968), a graduated campaign of bombing, was meant to, but didn’t, convince the North Vietnamese to give up their goal of expelling the foreign invaders — us — from South Vietnam. Fast-forward to our era and consider recent signals sent to North Korea and Iran by the Trump administration via B-52 bomber deployments, among other military “messages.” There’s no evidence that either country modified its behavior significantly in the face of the menace of those baby-boomer-era airplanes.
5. Air power is enormously expensive. Spending on aircraft, helicopters, and their munitions accounted for roughly half the cost of the Vietnam War. Similarly, in the present moment, making operational and then maintaining Lockheed Martin’s boondoggle of a jet fighter, the F-35, is expected to cost at least $1.45 trillion over its lifetime. The new B-21 stealth bomber will cost more than $100 billion simply to buy. Naval air wings on aircraft carriers cost billions each year to maintain and operate. These days, when the sky’s the limit for the Pentagon budget, such costs may be (barely) tolerable. When the money finally begins to run out, however, the military will likely suffer a serious hangover from its wildly extravagant spending on air power.
6. Aerial surveillance (as with drones), while useful, can also be misleading. Command of the high ground is not synonymous with god-like “total situational awareness.” It can instead prove to be a kind of delusion, while war practiced in its spirit often becomes little more than an exercise in destruction. You simply can’t negotiate a truce or take prisoners or foster other options when you’re high above a potential battlefield and your main recourse is blowing up people and things.
7. Air power is inherently offensive. That means it’s more consistent with imperial power projection than with national defense. As such, it fuels imperial ventures, while fostering the kind of “global reach, global power” thinking that has in these years had Air Force generals in its grip.
8. Despite the fantasies of those sending out the planes, air power often lengthens wars rather than shortening them. Consider Vietnam again. In the early 1960s, the Air Force argued that it alone could resolve that conflict at the lowest cost (mainly in American bodies). With enough bombs, napalm, and defoliants, victory was a sure thing and U.S. ground troops a kind of afterthought. (Initially, they were sent in mainly to protect the airfields from which those planes took off.) But bombing solved nothing and then the Army and the Marines decided that, if the Air Force couldn’t win, they sure as hell could. The result was escalation and disaster that left in the dust the original vision of a war won quickly and on the cheap due to American air supremacy.
9. Air power, even of the shock-and-awe variety, loses its impact over time. The enemy, lacking it, nonetheless learns to adapt by developing countermeasures — both active (like missiles) and passive (like camouflage and dispersion), even as those being bombed become more resilient and resolute.
10. Pounding peasants from two miles up is not exactly an ideal way to occupy the moral high ground in war.
The Road to Perdition
If I had to reduce these tenets to a single maxim, it would be this: all the happy talk about the techno-wonders of modern air power obscures its darker facets, especially its ability to lock America into what are effectively one-way wars with dead-end results.
For this reason, precision warfare is truly an oxymoron. War isn’t precise. It’s nasty, bloody, and murderous. War’s inherent nature — its unpredictability, horrors, and tendency to outlast its original causes and goals — isn’t changed when the bombs and missiles are guided by GPS. Washington’s enemies in its war on terror, moreover, have learned to adapt to air power in a grimly Darwinian fashion and have the advantage of fighting on their own turf.
Who doesn’t know the old riddle: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? Here’s a twenty-first-century air power variant on it: If foreign children die from American bombs but no U.S. media outlets report their deaths, will anyone grieve? Far too often, the answer here in the U.S. is no and so our wars go on into an endless future of global destruction.
In reality, this country might do better to simply ground its many fighter planes, bombers, and drones. Paradoxically, instead of gaining the high ground, they are keeping us on a low road to perdition.
Bracing Views 