• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Absolving the Casualty
ד"סב
Absolving the Casualty
In the world at large and in the blogosphere in particular, there seems to be quite a bitof confusion as to how to tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys". So let's work onthis together. We will play some word games and set definitions for commonly usedterms:
Terroristvs.Combatant
A
terrorist 
is an armed aggressor who predominately targets unarmed civilians or even armed fighters who are not currently engaged in combat. His intentions are never defensive. Only aggressive. Other terms for 
terrorist 
are
aggressors
or 
thugs
.A
combatant 
is an armed fighter who engages in combat with other armed fighters.His intentions are not necessarily aggressive. They may be defensive as well.A primary distinction between a
terrorist/thug 
to a
combatant 
is that the
terrorist/thug 
is interested in harming persons who are not interested in harmingthem. A
combatant 
is only interested in harming his opponent to the extent that hisopponent is interested in harming him.
Attackvs.Confrontation
An
attack 
is a physical assault with the intention of inflicting physical harm andsubduing a foe. As a rule, it is not preceded by any negotiable confrontation, demandsor ultimatum. There is also such a thing as a
verbal 
 
attack 
which is similar on allcounts. As with a
 physical 
 
attack 
, it is not preceded by any negotiable confrontation,demands or ultimatum. Its purpose is to inflict emotional damage and subdue a foe.Hence, it is quite difficult to forestall an
attack 
.
 Attacks
are perpetrated by
terrorists ,thugs
, or hostile forces.Pearl Harbor was an
attack 
. 9/11 was an
attack 
.A
confrontation
is an establishment of contact with another party with the intentionof accomplishing a stated goal. It may be friendly and it may be hostile but typically itis not immediately physical or violent. The focus is on the goal to be achieved andthere is no immediate intention to cause harm or damage to the other party. It isgenerally a presentation of demands, ultimatums, and an opening for negotiationwhich are intended to forestall the need for physical force to accomplish the goal.Physical force is generally not its goal but is resorted to if the
confrontational 
demands or ultimatums are not met. In many cases, the grounds for the
confrontation
are quite legitimate. Thus, one who
confronts
another and presents demands or ultimatums are not automatically
terrorists ,aggressors
, or 
thugs
.The Cuban Missile Crisis was a
confrontation
that could have escalated into physicalhostilities but did not. After that, John F. Kennedy was
attacked 
.A
confrontation
between
combatants
may be violent at the outset. But typically, bothsides know that they are engaging in a
confrontation
, are equally armed, and haveample opportunity to avert the
confrontation
with negotiation or flight. As suchDavid and Goliath was a
confrontation
as was the rumble between the Jets and theSharks. Nobody was forced to show up and nobody was spontaneously
attacked 
.© 2009 Yechezkel HirshmanPage 1
 
Absolving the Casualty
ד"סב
Massacrevs.Rout(Wipe-outor Fatal Defeat)
When an
aggressor 
(
terrorist 
)
attacks
an unarmed or non-aggressive party and killsthem, we say that they were
massacred 
. When two
combatants
or bands of 
combatants
have a deadly
confrontation
and one wipes out the other we may say thatit was a
rout 
but it is not accurate to call it a
massacre
. This is especially true in asituation where if one
combatant 
does not
rout 
the other, the other will
rout 
him.Leaving aside what led to the
confrontation
, once it began, the parties are not fightingas
aggressors
but for survival. Perhaps, if a
confrontation
developed into a
rout 
andone side offered to surrender and cease hostilities but was still killed out, we may saythat it evolved into a
massacre
. Such may be the case at Little Big Horn but there wasnobody left to tell us.
Terrorists
 
attack 
civilians and
massacre
them.
Combatants
 
confront 
each other and
rout 
,
defeat 
or 
wipe out 
their opponents.
Victim / Casualty
A
victim
is typically an unarmed or non-aggressive party who was the target of anaggressive event (
attack 
) and was physically, financially, or emotionally harmed (asin
massacred 
). A
victim
is one who had no personal control over the situation and didnot have the resources, the opportunity or the presence of mind to avert or flee thescene of the harmful event. Typically, a
victim
was not
confronted 
and presented withdemands and ultimatums before being
attacked 
. Someone is truly
victimized 
whenthey have done nothing of substance to contribute to the event that harmed them. Atrue
victim
is somebody who was merely in the wrong place at the wrong time.Conversely, one who knowingly and needlessly exposes themselves to a hazardoussituation or willfully engages in a physical
confrontation
(e.g. General Custer) and isharmed, is not known to be a
victim
but a
casualty
.
Terrorists
 
attack 
civilians andthose civilians are
victims
of a
massacre
.
Combatants
 
confront 
each other and inflict
casualties
. We say that one is a
victim
of an
attack 
but we do not say that one is a
victim
of a
confrontation
. In a
confrontation
, one is not a
victim
but a
casualty
. ThusI have a very hard time calling General Custer and his men
victims
. Nor would I callRiff of the Jets a
victim
of Bernardo. Especially since he is the one who called therumble.So, to sum up,
terrorists
 
attacked 
the Twin Towers and
massacred 
many
victims
.Armed forced – 
combatants
– 
confronted 
each other at Gettysburg and inflicted many
casualties
. We would not call David a
terrorist 
but a
combatant 
. We would not calltheir fight an
attack 
(who
attacked 
who?) but a
confrontation
. We would not callGoliath a
victim
but a
casualty
. Nor would we call his death a
massacre
but a
 fatal defeat 
.
A Closer Look atVictimhood
We now established that
victims
are targets of 
attacks
by
terrorists
or 
thugs
. They arenot the subjects of 
confrontations
that escalated by mutual input and eventuallyturned violent. It may be said that one can be
victimized 
by an aggressive
confrontation
, but if the
confrontation
was foreseeable and avoidable, we must hold© 2009 Yechezkel HirshmanPage 2
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...