A recent photograph on the BBC website so affected one Salon reader that he was moved to write to the magazine and share his response to the picture and to the war in Iraq.
Mr J. Scott Smith writes, "Perhaps, being a new father, I am overly sensitive to such things, but today the image I saw on my computer screen brought me to tears."
The picture of an anonymous father and child lying dead in each others arms in the streets of Fallujah left Mr Scott wretched at the mindless waste, cruelty and brutality of a war that is essentially groundless.
Mr Scott's article in turn left me tearful.
When is a war not groundless? Essentially?
I have no children of my own; but I am a daughter. I am a wife. A sister. I want to become a mother one day. How could I, in all consciousness, ever send my son or daughter into battle?
How does a nation convince its mothers and fathers to send their children to war? To their own deaths?
How does this happen? What kind of psychosis is hot wired into humanity, that we are capable of this?
Why does this fatal lack of imagination occur: the inability to put ourselves in another's place?
If Mr Bush were made to somehow physically experience the fear and bowl loosening terror of war, of huddling in the basement with his wife and daughters while exploding shells thundered above his head and phosphorus rained down - would this war have happened?
How does killing another's child, husband, wife or brother bring about democracy? How do you create peace with violence?
Would you take the life of your own child? Your mother? Your father? A brother or sister?
Article comments
1 - Taloran
I hear you loud and clear.
2 - Voxxy
Yeah, where did we get off fighting the Japanese and the Germans? How could we expect war to bring democracy and peace?
Oh yeah, it did.
3 - Eric Olsen
Kirsten, all of this is important, natural and true, but I fear military conflict is a simple fact of human interaction at this point in history. If you accept that premise -- and unless you are a total pacifist, surely self-defense is defensible -- then all of the ugly consequences flow from that.
And I'm just talking about war in general, not any war in particular. whether Iraq is justified or not is another argument entirely.
4 - Kirsten
Yeah, I mean, thanks for pointing that out. But, that is my point also: how did Hitler convince people that taking others lives was acceptable? By vilifying the enemy. By dehumanizing the "enemy". The monster under the bed. If he'd told people to kill their own parents, or children, would they have done so? Do you see what I mean? Who is the real enemy?
5 - Kirsten
Yeah, and I know all the arguments for defending oneself, etc. Mostly it's way too complicated to comprehend, to figure out where I stand morally. And sometimes it seems blindingly clear and simple. I would not take my own father's life. Why would I take someone else's father away from them? If everybody thought this way, would war occur?
It may be too simple and childish to think this way. But intuitively, it feels right.
6 - Scoota Rey
Yeah, I agree with Voxxy (funny name). War is horrible and I really don't agree with the War in Iraq, but if there was no war, we would probably still be living in the stone age. World history itself is 60% war and conflict, many of these wars (American Revolution, American Civil War, French Revolution, World War II, etc.) were very violent, but the change caused by these wars were so prosperous that humanity itself would be doing itself a disservice if it just wanted things to stay the same without fighting.
7 - SFC Ski
History has proven some wars to be unnecessary, and soem to be not only necessary but unavoidable, unfortunately, history is a study in hindsight, and it often years after a conflict has ended before it's necessity and worth, as well as aftereffects can be determined.
Kirsten ,you make the common error of asking questions out of context. On its face, no one would willing ly kill someone's father, but Saddam Hussein is a father of two sons, Uday and Qusay, in light of their depradations who can argue that sparing them because they are fathers is the right answer?
8 - The Dude
So what some of you are saying is that we should kill as many people as possible to bring peace ... How come that sounds so wrong?
Is war the correct way, the only way? If so, why aren't you fighting in this war, or any war for that matter?
I think it's very easy to sit back and say that we have to fight "evil," but it's another thing when you are under a bed hearing the bombs fall around you.
Maybe if people can put themselves in others' shoes, this world wouldn't be such a fucked up place.
But hey, that's just me. Okay now, let the shit fly.
9 - Eric Olsen
yes, sometimes we should kill as many people as possible to bring peace: if everyone who had ever taken up arms for, say, al Qaeda were to be killed, the world would be a much more peaceful place.
10 - The Dude
I don't think I would trust you, me or any other goober carrying arms. Don't take it personally, but I just don't trust you, nor should you trust me.
11 - Eric Olsen
I'll keep it in mind
12 - SFC Ski
Dude, it's OK, go on with your ambivalence, we'll take care of business for you.
13 - Scoota Rey
I would bear arms to fight for peace--just not in this war. First of all because I am too young to join the military and I don't agree with the war for many reasons which I have already stated on this site.
14 - cur3t
"yes, sometimes we should kill as many people as possible to bring peace..."
how do you plan on killing all those people? with type-written words?