To the editor:
Regarding the editorial headlined “Cowardly acts cannot bring down our fighting spirit,” (the Times, Wednesday, April 17), I strongly disagree with the word “cowardly.”
The 9-11 terrorists willingly died in their attack, but many of us labeled them “cowards.” Surely, Osama bin Laden knew that he would likely die the way he did, in a shower of American bullets, or perhaps live out the rest of his life in a tiny cell in Guantanamo, but far too many of us called him a coward. Imperial Japan attacked us, and our president, Franklin Roosevelt, called them “dastardly,” even though they knew that they were attacking a nation that was much more powerful than their own.
The Boston Marathon bomber or bombers put their futures at risk, and unless they are utterly crazy and delusional, they know that they’ll very likely spend the rest of their lives in a prison or die when they the police come to arrest them.
I do not defend the leaders of Imperial Japan, al-Qaida and bin Laden, or the marathon bomber or bombers. They deserve our loathing. But they were not or are not “cowards,” as much as some of us my feel comfort in dehumanizing and demonizing them in that way.
And think about it. Our unmanned drones kill our enemies, along with innocents on the other side of the world, with no risk to any American. Even when American service men and women actually pull the trigger, they are often far away, in a jet or in a ship, at sea. The president, safely on the other side of the planet, gives the order.
I merely mean to ask that, if placing a bomb on a street or in a trash can and going somewhere to hide is “cowardly,” then what of our nation’s own remote-control bombings?