One thing is pretty much guaranteed, in the wake of a big-time news event: people are going to make it about themselves.
When Osama bin Laden is killed in a raid in Pakistan, politically-inclined folks in the U.S. are immediately going to wonder how this impacts the 2012 elections. Obama supporters are going to celebrate a bit more readily than they would have if the same thing had happened when George W. Bush was in office. Obama’s opponents are going to be a bit more skeptical, likewise. (From Free Republic: “We got him in spite of Obama, he’s more interested in getting our military Homosexualized than he is about any war on terror.”) Or they will use the opportunity to make some sort of political statement amidst the crowd outside the White House.
People from NYC and DC and elsewhere who lost friends and family on 9/11 might attain a bit of closure. Pakistanis will both worry about and celebrate how the operation went down. In China, some will mourn the loss of a strong anti-American presence, while others will lump bin Laden in with their own Politburo as forces of evil in the world. People who think about social media will focus on the way the news bypassed traditional channels. Wolf Blitzer will make sure a national TV audience understands that this was big enough news to drag him from home into the studio.
All that is okay. When news hits, we don’t immediately leap from receiving new information to having a fully developed and highly nuanced set of reactions. If people naturally interact with the news in terms of their pre-existing feelings and interests, let them. Some people are going to celebrate the death of a terrorist, while others will recoil at celebrating the death of anybody. It should be fine either way; let people have their moments.
I have no idea what the ramifications of the raid on bin Laden’s compound are going to be for international relations. Generally I lean toward the side that we focused on one guy because it’s useful to personalize the enemy in wartime, not because bin Laden himself was the real problem. But what do I know? It could be that he served a crucial symbolic or even operational role, and that this will really diminish the scope of al-Qaeda terrorism. Or maybe it will serve as a rallying cry, and things will get worse. I suspect that going through security at airports is going to be even more intrusive than usual for the next few months.
The social-media cognoscenti certainly do have something to talk about. In the soon-to-be-immortal words of Bill the Lizard, “I heard about 9/11 on the radio, bin Laden’s death on Twitter.” Me too. We did actually turn on the TV when it became clear that big news was coming. What a contrast; the internet was interesting and lively, while the TV pundits swerved between ponderous and clueless.
And, naturally, the attack itself was live-tweeted. Inadvertently, by an IT consultant in Pakistan named Sohaib Athar. It all started somewhat mysteriously…
But soon enough things began to escalate.
Once the news came out, the poor guy was deluged.
All he wanted was a cup of coffee.
Don’t people know that they should be looking at Facebook instead?
Remember Zhou Enlai, when asked in 1972 about the impact of the French Revolution: “It’s too soon to say.” News travels ever more quickly, but it still takes time for the ultimate result to become clear.
“Sohaib Athar” … so what are the odds that name will be the answer to a future trivia question?
Well golly, all it took was–nine and a half years, 6018 US troop killed, 42,517 troops wounded, a couple of million civilian deaths, a whole host of our rights and liberties stripped from us–to accomplish this. I wonder how many more troops will be killed or wounded before we realize this wasn’t about people at all.
Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the medieval Islamic memosphere are irrelevant. The “war on terror” was always a sideshow, a brief chapter that is now closing. The Rise of the Machines has begun and the front line is Pakistan, but it is spreading. The medievalist holdouts will be crushed beneath the boots of autonomous military robots; their networks will be rooted out and their memes systematically annihilated by the global surveillance systems. Muslim militants were the first test for the global control architecture and they lost (in fact they never had a chance). Next comes cyberwar and the AI arms race for global supremacy between advanced nations and networks. Now the real war begins…
@Alpha Omega:
So Judgement Day is coming soon ? But wasn’t it supposed to have happened in 1997 with Skynet taking over ?
Sean,
It’s a little dispiriting to see the shallow of comments you get on a serious post about serious actions with serious consequences for our future. I have to think that serious people are digesting this, pondering the complexities and consequences.
For my part, I think that this murder’s death is a clearly a net plus; but many years ago (many more than I’d like to admit) I was into all things Chinese and I often used to repeat the same Zhou Enlai quote (sadly for the most part, to brag how I took a long-term, mature, view). Still, the quote is good, because, time will, in the long run, actually tell the tale.
For those among us who view this act as no different than any other, you can believe that our position is the same as the terrorists and basically symmetrical only by expunging morality from your analysis: seeing all political objectives as being legitimate, all rival value systems as matters of taste, treating murderers and their victims with evenhanded sympathy. You have to look at tolerance and its opposite, intolerance, and pretend that they are two versions of the same thing. You have to pretend that the richness and diversity and creativity of our civilisation are playing the same role in our lives as empty repetition, oppression, and pitiless enforcement of a monoculture play in theirs.
@Cosmonut: No, they averted that in the second movie.
I trust that the opponents of capital punishment will be staging loud protests outside the White House? You know, the way they got all upset when the Israelis offed Eichmann?
I am sure it was very exciting for the Seals who carried out this operation – I would like to be a hero knowing – Violence begets more violence – and pretty soon everyone and their sister will want to join in the *fun* Too bad they could not put a sleeping net around the house and take everyone alive.
@Aplha Omega: The natural occupation of man is really husbandry.
One thing is pretty much guaranteed, in the wake of a big-time news event: people are going to make it about themselves.
—————–
Spot on about that one.
Here, in India, the main feeling is vindication.
The standing joke here about bin Laden was that America was wasting its time looking in Afghanistan, they should just search Musharraf’s house instead.
Its really a bit eerie that this came so close to the truth.
CosmicVariance is a political blog, once again?
A global-warming hot spot.
All that’s Left is more annoying than anything.
Pingback: Daily Dough #48 « smoke me a kipper; I'll be back for breakfast
Well one thing is clear: in 1945 they gave Goering and consorts a fair trial. in 2011 a marine just shoots the guy in the head.
way to go, civilization! hail the Nobel peace price winner.
Hey Chris (12), Can you go be self-superior somewhere else?
As has been noted in the press, every attempt to bring Bin Laden in alive was made by the Seal team, but they were not able to do so. Your tired “civilization is in decline” stick is not so clear cut. After all, Chris, think back to a few years before Goering… did they give John Dillinger a fair trial? That was a much more clear cut case of straight out assassination.
I doubt that Osama dead or Osama alive will make much difference in 10 years time. Search engine statistics showed that huge numbers of teenagers asked “Who is Osama bin Laden” after the news broke. These young people have always lived in a world in which millions of air travellers undergo insulting and ineffective searches, a world in which the West is embroiled in a land war in Asia and they will continue to live in this way for years to come. Their children will hear the name Osama bin Laden in a boring history class and forget it soon after.
Alan (#14), you got an ironic laugh from me. I’d love to berate you for being cynical … but I can’t. Sometimes the level of (un)awareness in our society is disheartening.
But, on the brighter side, this event may (just “may”) change the dynamic of terrorism. I’m convinced that this is not a “war”, rather, should be an international police action. I’m convinced that this approach would be less intrusive on civilians, military, international relations … and just as effective.
After hundred thousands died in the war on terror, they got the one who was responsible for the first three thousand. Yeah, what an achievement.
Generally I lean toward the side that we focused on one guy because it’s useful to personalize the enemy in wartime, not because bin Laden himself was the real problem.
Generally this is an American manner, everything is personalized, all
politics (internal and abroad) not only at wartime.
This and an inclination on either black or white, good or evil,
is smiled at in Europe as a sign for America beeing a “Young”
nation, to say it as polite as possible.
The idea that “Obama” killed him (or ordered it, not Bush)
is another instant of this thinking. Such orders can be a necessity,
if this depends on who is president, US is in big danger.
I second the thought that it is a bit dispiriting to see the number of shallow comments on a blog that portends to delve into the deeper meaning of things.
There is a thing in this country that is called the rule of law. It is what holds our society together. Ten years ago an organization led by a man named Osama Bin Laden murdered over 3000 of our citizens in cold blood. Our country sought to bring that man to justice. You can disagree with the decisions that were made between now and then but there is no doubt that bringing to justice the person responsible for those deaths was the right thing. And yes – we really don’t need to have a fair trial for someone who was admittedly overjoyed by the results of his actions on that unforgettable September day.
We still have time to steer the consequences. A debate on how is always welcome. But questioning who we should bring to justice and who we might not depending on the longer term affects goes against the basic foundation of our country.
“This and an inclination on either . . . good or evil, is smiled at in Europe as a sign for America being a “Young” nation, to say it as polite as possible”
Yes, perhaps this can sometimes be a shortcoming among Americans. However, seeing all political objectives as being legitimate, all rival value systems as matters of taste, and treating murderers and their victims with evenhanded sympathy is too often a sign of Europe being “old” — to say it as polite as possible.
@Mike: Only because criminals aren’t treated inhumanly as in the US (harsh sentences, in particular the death penalty and life without parole for minors; overcrowded prisons) doesn’t mean that they receive the same sympathy as their victims. Unfortunately, I have to agree that Europe isn’t very consistent about its own values. Otherwise, it would speak out more loudly against violations of human rights by the US (the Iraq war, torture, Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, …).
One thing is pretty much guaranteed, in the wake of a big-time news event: people are going to make it about themselves.
My TV showed a scene from earlier in the evening of jubilant fans at the Phillies – Mets baseball game yelling “USA, USA” when they became aware of the news of Osama Bin Laden’s death. The scoreboard in the back indicated that at that time, the game had been tied 1-1 in the ninth inning. My most consuming thought? “I wonder who won the game.”
“we really don’t need to have a fair trial for someone who was admittedly overjoyed by the results of his actions”
right, right. and while at it, why not kill Assange as fox news already wanted to?
kill the ugly and the world will become beautiful.
Osama Bin Laden should have been taken alive. When a leader is captured – He should be the *guests* of those of his same rank , invited to gamble till he has lost all his money and set free!
The rule of law can be a pretty dicey path to justice. Right / Wrong – who can say ?
Assange has very little money but as humans go he ranks very high.
Spare us your air of European self-importance, Georg. Not 70 years ago Europe was still a den of stick-wielding savages that sparked not one but two World Wars. The social democracies that have sprouted in the post-WWII era have thrived only because the Western European governments have abdicated the protection of the Continent to the US, and huddled under the American nuclear umbrella. It’ll be interesting to see if the EU can right their economic ship before Spain’s economic crisis drags down the whole grand social democratic experiment. The political situation would be scary — a recipe for a hard swing to the right — if Europe weren’t so weak, as evidenced by their inability to manage a relatively small military situation, Libya, right in their own backyard.
Spare us your air of American arrogance, Kris. Eighty years earlier, the US was still a country of slave holders and it required a brutal civil war for abolition. Countries change. And after waging an illegal war in Iraq that killed a hundred thousand or more innocents, a bit more humbleness would do your country well.