As humanity reaches for a green existence -- as it struggles to find its way back into the circle of life -- it must step beyond the insanity of war. (Photo: Sebastiano Tomada/Getty Images Reportage Reportage)
Is Yemen Our Future?
The word “war” may be the most powerful word in human history, because it creates a mask of respectability for—that is, it conceals—the dehumanization and mass slaughter of a designated enemy, along with limitless environmental contamination
"They must kill and continue to kill, strange as it may seem, in order not to know that they are killing." -- Rene Girard, Things Hidden since the Foundation of the World
Socially sanctioned killing is called war. The word "war" may be the most powerful word in human history, because it creates a mask of respectability for -- that is, it conceals -- the dehumanization and mass slaughter of a designated enemy, along with limitless environmental contamination. When we're "waging war," we have given ourselves permission not to know what we are doing, even if what we're doing is putting life on Planet Earth in danger of extinction.
When we're "waging war," we have given ourselves permission not to know what we are doing, even if what we're doing is putting life on Planet Earth in danger of extinction.
Say hello to Yemen, the possible future of all of us!
"Jagged pieces of bomb flew thousands of miles per hour outward, and Rabee'a -- still celebrating his success -- was almost fully decapitated. The top half of his face was removed, leaving just an open lower jaw; the heat of the blast burned most of his clothes off and charred his skin, so he was left naked, his genitals exposed, his body actually smoking. Next to him, his cousin Al-Qadi, the judge, was burning alive, his blood vessels expelling water and his body inflating. He began to scream."
These words are from an extraordinary piece of reporting by Jeffrey Stern in New York Times Magazine, about a Saudi bombing raid at a water well in Yemen two years ago, in which 31 people may have died, although, as he pointed out, "It's hard to know the numbers for sure, because all that was left of many victims were very small parts, very far from one another."
Three of the dismembered dead were children, if that makes any difference (oh Republican congresspersons).
Also of note: The bombing run, as is hideously typical, came in two waves. The first bomb killed a few people. A second barrage of bombs rained down six hours later, after a crowd of rescuers and onlookers had gathered.
There are several unusual aspects about this story. One is its closeup, personal look at death. Sure, 50,000 Yemenis may have died in the fighting over the three-and-a-half-year course of this war, with another 85,000 dying of starvation (including lots and lots of children), and a million are on the brink of starvation or in danger of contracting cholera (the war has triggered the worst cholera outbreak in recorded history), but unfathomably large numbers like this quickly become abstract, the generic cost of war, as the media focus moves to strategy and politics.
Also unusual is that the dead the story humanizes for us weren't killed by America's enemy. These are our dead, you might say. While the Yemen war is being waged by Saudi Arabia, its primary ally and major weapon supplier is the United States. The bombs that dismembered several dozen Yemenis were built by Raytheon, part of the American military-industrial complex and a major supplier of jobs. Stern even visited Tucson, where Raytheon employs 10,000 people; he went to a union hall and talked to some of them. They're good, decent people!
So what we're left with is the grotesque paradox of high-tech mass murder, i.e., modern war, waged and supported by the well-meaning and the innocent. Sorry about the dead but, you know, jobs!
So what we're left with is the grotesque paradox of high-tech mass murder, i.e., modern war, waged and supported by the well-meaning and the innocent. Sorry about the dead but, you know, jobs!
All of which leads me to another unusual occurrence, known as S.J. Res. 54: the Senate resolution that passed last week by a vote of 56 to 41 (with seven Republican senators joining all the Democrats), banning U.S. military participation in the Yemen war. Specifically, the resolution prohibits the U.S. military from providing the Saudis with aerial targeting assistance, intelligence sharing and mid-flight aerial refueling, which it is currently doing.
As lots of people have pointed out, right now this resolution is merely symbolic, because it won't pass, or even come up for a vote, in the House. Furthermore, the resolution doesn't address the worst aspect of U.S. involvement in this war: the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia. Billions and billions of dollars' worth of weapons! Bush, Obama and Trump have all salivated over the Saudi weapons gusher. The U.S. economy is -- what? A starving Yemeni child without it?
That said, the Senate resolution nonetheless matters hugely (you might say, in honor of co-sponsor Bernie Sanders). For one thing, Dems gain control of the House next year and the resolution could be reintroduced. Also, according to Reuters, some of the supporters are determined to introduce legislation calling for a ban on weapons sales to the Saudis; in other words, there's more political action to come regarding U.S. involvement in this war.
But most significantly, this resolution represents the first time Congress has ever demanded the withdrawal of U.S. forces from a war under the War Powers Act, which was passed into law in 1973. It's the first time Congress has ever stood up to the warmaker in chief or the military-industrial complex.
I declare, by the power vested in me as an ordinary person, that this matters . . . indeed, that this is not politics as usual or a reflection of competing selfish interests, but a sign that species evolution has gained political traction. Planet Earth cannot survive in a state of endless preparation for war against itself.
I declare that the human race is in the process of redefining itself. The last people to know about this are the powerful, the ones with the largest investment in the status quo, but even they are learning in spite of themselves.
As humanity reaches for a green existence -- as it struggles to find its way back into the circle of life -- it must step beyond the insanity of war. We must know that we are killing, at long last, and find within the courage to stop.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
"They must kill and continue to kill, strange as it may seem, in order not to know that they are killing." -- Rene Girard, Things Hidden since the Foundation of the World
Socially sanctioned killing is called war. The word "war" may be the most powerful word in human history, because it creates a mask of respectability for -- that is, it conceals -- the dehumanization and mass slaughter of a designated enemy, along with limitless environmental contamination. When we're "waging war," we have given ourselves permission not to know what we are doing, even if what we're doing is putting life on Planet Earth in danger of extinction.
When we're "waging war," we have given ourselves permission not to know what we are doing, even if what we're doing is putting life on Planet Earth in danger of extinction.
Say hello to Yemen, the possible future of all of us!
"Jagged pieces of bomb flew thousands of miles per hour outward, and Rabee'a -- still celebrating his success -- was almost fully decapitated. The top half of his face was removed, leaving just an open lower jaw; the heat of the blast burned most of his clothes off and charred his skin, so he was left naked, his genitals exposed, his body actually smoking. Next to him, his cousin Al-Qadi, the judge, was burning alive, his blood vessels expelling water and his body inflating. He began to scream."
These words are from an extraordinary piece of reporting by Jeffrey Stern in New York Times Magazine, about a Saudi bombing raid at a water well in Yemen two years ago, in which 31 people may have died, although, as he pointed out, "It's hard to know the numbers for sure, because all that was left of many victims were very small parts, very far from one another."
Three of the dismembered dead were children, if that makes any difference (oh Republican congresspersons).
Also of note: The bombing run, as is hideously typical, came in two waves. The first bomb killed a few people. A second barrage of bombs rained down six hours later, after a crowd of rescuers and onlookers had gathered.
There are several unusual aspects about this story. One is its closeup, personal look at death. Sure, 50,000 Yemenis may have died in the fighting over the three-and-a-half-year course of this war, with another 85,000 dying of starvation (including lots and lots of children), and a million are on the brink of starvation or in danger of contracting cholera (the war has triggered the worst cholera outbreak in recorded history), but unfathomably large numbers like this quickly become abstract, the generic cost of war, as the media focus moves to strategy and politics.
Also unusual is that the dead the story humanizes for us weren't killed by America's enemy. These are our dead, you might say. While the Yemen war is being waged by Saudi Arabia, its primary ally and major weapon supplier is the United States. The bombs that dismembered several dozen Yemenis were built by Raytheon, part of the American military-industrial complex and a major supplier of jobs. Stern even visited Tucson, where Raytheon employs 10,000 people; he went to a union hall and talked to some of them. They're good, decent people!
So what we're left with is the grotesque paradox of high-tech mass murder, i.e., modern war, waged and supported by the well-meaning and the innocent. Sorry about the dead but, you know, jobs!
So what we're left with is the grotesque paradox of high-tech mass murder, i.e., modern war, waged and supported by the well-meaning and the innocent. Sorry about the dead but, you know, jobs!
All of which leads me to another unusual occurrence, known as S.J. Res. 54: the Senate resolution that passed last week by a vote of 56 to 41 (with seven Republican senators joining all the Democrats), banning U.S. military participation in the Yemen war. Specifically, the resolution prohibits the U.S. military from providing the Saudis with aerial targeting assistance, intelligence sharing and mid-flight aerial refueling, which it is currently doing.
As lots of people have pointed out, right now this resolution is merely symbolic, because it won't pass, or even come up for a vote, in the House. Furthermore, the resolution doesn't address the worst aspect of U.S. involvement in this war: the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia. Billions and billions of dollars' worth of weapons! Bush, Obama and Trump have all salivated over the Saudi weapons gusher. The U.S. economy is -- what? A starving Yemeni child without it?
That said, the Senate resolution nonetheless matters hugely (you might say, in honor of co-sponsor Bernie Sanders). For one thing, Dems gain control of the House next year and the resolution could be reintroduced. Also, according to Reuters, some of the supporters are determined to introduce legislation calling for a ban on weapons sales to the Saudis; in other words, there's more political action to come regarding U.S. involvement in this war.
But most significantly, this resolution represents the first time Congress has ever demanded the withdrawal of U.S. forces from a war under the War Powers Act, which was passed into law in 1973. It's the first time Congress has ever stood up to the warmaker in chief or the military-industrial complex.
I declare, by the power vested in me as an ordinary person, that this matters . . . indeed, that this is not politics as usual or a reflection of competing selfish interests, but a sign that species evolution has gained political traction. Planet Earth cannot survive in a state of endless preparation for war against itself.
I declare that the human race is in the process of redefining itself. The last people to know about this are the powerful, the ones with the largest investment in the status quo, but even they are learning in spite of themselves.
As humanity reaches for a green existence -- as it struggles to find its way back into the circle of life -- it must step beyond the insanity of war. We must know that we are killing, at long last, and find within the courage to stop.
"They must kill and continue to kill, strange as it may seem, in order not to know that they are killing." -- Rene Girard, Things Hidden since the Foundation of the World
Socially sanctioned killing is called war. The word "war" may be the most powerful word in human history, because it creates a mask of respectability for -- that is, it conceals -- the dehumanization and mass slaughter of a designated enemy, along with limitless environmental contamination. When we're "waging war," we have given ourselves permission not to know what we are doing, even if what we're doing is putting life on Planet Earth in danger of extinction.
When we're "waging war," we have given ourselves permission not to know what we are doing, even if what we're doing is putting life on Planet Earth in danger of extinction.
Say hello to Yemen, the possible future of all of us!
"Jagged pieces of bomb flew thousands of miles per hour outward, and Rabee'a -- still celebrating his success -- was almost fully decapitated. The top half of his face was removed, leaving just an open lower jaw; the heat of the blast burned most of his clothes off and charred his skin, so he was left naked, his genitals exposed, his body actually smoking. Next to him, his cousin Al-Qadi, the judge, was burning alive, his blood vessels expelling water and his body inflating. He began to scream."
These words are from an extraordinary piece of reporting by Jeffrey Stern in New York Times Magazine, about a Saudi bombing raid at a water well in Yemen two years ago, in which 31 people may have died, although, as he pointed out, "It's hard to know the numbers for sure, because all that was left of many victims were very small parts, very far from one another."
Three of the dismembered dead were children, if that makes any difference (oh Republican congresspersons).
Also of note: The bombing run, as is hideously typical, came in two waves. The first bomb killed a few people. A second barrage of bombs rained down six hours later, after a crowd of rescuers and onlookers had gathered.
There are several unusual aspects about this story. One is its closeup, personal look at death. Sure, 50,000 Yemenis may have died in the fighting over the three-and-a-half-year course of this war, with another 85,000 dying of starvation (including lots and lots of children), and a million are on the brink of starvation or in danger of contracting cholera (the war has triggered the worst cholera outbreak in recorded history), but unfathomably large numbers like this quickly become abstract, the generic cost of war, as the media focus moves to strategy and politics.
Also unusual is that the dead the story humanizes for us weren't killed by America's enemy. These are our dead, you might say. While the Yemen war is being waged by Saudi Arabia, its primary ally and major weapon supplier is the United States. The bombs that dismembered several dozen Yemenis were built by Raytheon, part of the American military-industrial complex and a major supplier of jobs. Stern even visited Tucson, where Raytheon employs 10,000 people; he went to a union hall and talked to some of them. They're good, decent people!
So what we're left with is the grotesque paradox of high-tech mass murder, i.e., modern war, waged and supported by the well-meaning and the innocent. Sorry about the dead but, you know, jobs!
So what we're left with is the grotesque paradox of high-tech mass murder, i.e., modern war, waged and supported by the well-meaning and the innocent. Sorry about the dead but, you know, jobs!
All of which leads me to another unusual occurrence, known as S.J. Res. 54: the Senate resolution that passed last week by a vote of 56 to 41 (with seven Republican senators joining all the Democrats), banning U.S. military participation in the Yemen war. Specifically, the resolution prohibits the U.S. military from providing the Saudis with aerial targeting assistance, intelligence sharing and mid-flight aerial refueling, which it is currently doing.
As lots of people have pointed out, right now this resolution is merely symbolic, because it won't pass, or even come up for a vote, in the House. Furthermore, the resolution doesn't address the worst aspect of U.S. involvement in this war: the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia. Billions and billions of dollars' worth of weapons! Bush, Obama and Trump have all salivated over the Saudi weapons gusher. The U.S. economy is -- what? A starving Yemeni child without it?
That said, the Senate resolution nonetheless matters hugely (you might say, in honor of co-sponsor Bernie Sanders). For one thing, Dems gain control of the House next year and the resolution could be reintroduced. Also, according to Reuters, some of the supporters are determined to introduce legislation calling for a ban on weapons sales to the Saudis; in other words, there's more political action to come regarding U.S. involvement in this war.
But most significantly, this resolution represents the first time Congress has ever demanded the withdrawal of U.S. forces from a war under the War Powers Act, which was passed into law in 1973. It's the first time Congress has ever stood up to the warmaker in chief or the military-industrial complex.
I declare, by the power vested in me as an ordinary person, that this matters . . . indeed, that this is not politics as usual or a reflection of competing selfish interests, but a sign that species evolution has gained political traction. Planet Earth cannot survive in a state of endless preparation for war against itself.
I declare that the human race is in the process of redefining itself. The last people to know about this are the powerful, the ones with the largest investment in the status quo, but even they are learning in spite of themselves.
As humanity reaches for a green existence -- as it struggles to find its way back into the circle of life -- it must step beyond the insanity of war. We must know that we are killing, at long last, and find within the courage to stop.