I quote the memorable words of that less than memorable lady, Hillary Clinton, because they (sort of) seem appropriate to the current 'shock-horror story' (and I absolutely do not intend any irony in that phrase) concerning the execution in Syria of James Foley by, apparently, a London-based Islamic fighter called 'John'. Before going any further let me pay tribute to Mr. Foley who was, judging by his calm demeanour in the photograph taken prior to his execution, an exceedingly brave man. I would pray for an ounce of his courage were I ever to face imminent death.
Once again I find myself shaking my head in sorrow at yet another example of man's inhumanity to man which is, of course, as old as Mankind. Certain commentators will heap curses on the head of the executioner and his fellow jihadists and, to be fair, if I had the chance I would shoot 'John' out of hand . . . and yet . . . and yet . . . what, exactly and precisely, is the difference between 'John' and, say, 'Lt. Wotsisname' of the USAF sitting in a bunker in Texas guiding a drone missile into a car in a street in Iraq on the assumption that it contains some 'baddies' but irrespective if the collateral damage on the street takes out a few women and children?
Well, one difference is obvious. 'John' has to possess, God help him, an unthinking and all-possessing hatred to help him overcome even the minimal human feelings he possesses because chopping someone's head off is about as up close and personal as you can get in the 'killing game'. On the other hand, all that 'Lt. Wotsisname' has to do is press a button and then supress his imagination. The point I am meandering towards is this: given that it is war, is there any real moral difference between the two acts?
(I have to go out this morning so I will leave the question with you. Hopefully I will have enough spare time to think on it myself and see if I can grope my way to a conclusion. See you later!)
