One Might Quibble

July 11th, 2008

Found this at Max Forte’s Open Anthropology, where I have the feeling I’ll be spending an afternoon or two in the near future.

Agreeing with writers such as Ward Churchill, I have been arguing that the notion that the U.S. does not “intentionally” kill civilians in its bombings of civilian areas, and thus is “not terrorism” is not a convincing argument. U.S. military planners know that the bombings will kill civilians, they pre-label the fatalities as “collateral damage” and prepare press briefings in advance condemning the enemy for using “human shields” — that the enemy wants to defend its neighbourhoods is dismissed — and this amounts to a logic of calculated killing, of knowing murder, and thus terrorism. One might quibble about whether the primary or secondary target is civilian.

Keep reading.

One Response to “One Might Quibble”

  1. Max Forte Says:

    I have spent a bit of time reading through parts of your great blog, and I am very sorry that I have missed it until you found me. You can count me as a regular reader from now on, and thanks for the work you are doing here.

Leave a Reply