Over Reaction?

Hallowed Earth

The National September 11 Memorial New York City. The Memorial is Located at the World Trade Centre site, on the former location of the Twin Towers destroyed during terrorist attacks. It's a Memorial to the near 3000 people killed not only in the attack on the Trade Centre Towers but also at The Pentagon, those on board Flight 93, and also those killed in 1993 when the North Tower of The World Centre was bombed.

The Memorial Park was officially opened one day after the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks, on the 12th of September 2012. The events of 9/11 have gone down in history as the  deadliest terrorist strike against the United States ever. 

During a recent visit to New York over the festive season, I made my way to the site of the Memorial to pay my respects. It's the second time I have visited the site of the former Twin Towers, last time I was here the park was still under construction, but just because I've been before my visit was no less mournful.

This brings me on to the subject of this weeks blog.

Several weeks ago, during a conversation with a Major in the Unites States Air Force, we somehow got on to the subject of 9/11. The Major told me that a British friend of his serving in the Royal Air Force had said to him , "America overreacted after the terrorist attacks of 9/11". The Major went on to say that, "only because I have a great deal of respect for this guy, I actually considered whether there was any truth in what he'd said".

The subject of 9/11 holds many emotional memories for everyone. For instance, everyone remembers where they were, what they were doing, and the feelings they had watching events unfold on news channels across the globe. And with this in mind, I offered no opinion on what he'd just said and simply chose to listen. 

I could see the Major was having difficulty formulating a response to the comments from his British friend, but after a short pause he simply said, "maybe we did, but we had to do something"

In the aftermath of 9/11 America and its Allies embarked on a, "War on Terror". This war was a military campaign designed to eliminate al-Qaeda and other militant organisations. Since this War began it's transformed into a political and idealogical struggle against militant Islamists and governments or regimes that support them.

We are now over ten years into this "War on Terror" and what that American said about overreaction got me thinking about the real cost of all these years of struggle.

The War in Iraq claimed the lives of around 5000 soldiers from around the world, and estimates for civilians deaths range from over 100,000 to just under 1,000,000. The numbers for civilian casualties includes, not only those killed as a direct result of the War but also those killed indirectly when displaced by the fighting.

The War in Afghanistan has claimed to date the lives of around 3500 soldiers from around the world and estimates for civilian deaths range from 14,000 to around 20,000. The numbers for civilian casualties in Afghanistan are widely recognised as being grossly underestimated but as its difficult to trace civilian deaths and the UN didn't start counting these deaths till 2007 this is the best estimate available.

The financial cost to the US and its Allies of both the Iraq and Afghanistan war is estimated to be in the region of 1.3 - 4 trillion dollars. 

When you visit a site like this, where such an awful and cruel atrocity was carried out you truly are treading on hallowed ground. To me it feels as if all the souls that perished here have somehow woven a sadness into the very fabric of the earth. 

Writing the last few sentences I can feel a heaviness in my heart and  sorrow washing over me once more. Thinking of my last visit, I am suddenly transported back to the Memorial, looking down at the names I notice what I first think is a very long name on the pool edge, only to be hit with the harsh realisation that the name belongs to a mother and her unborn child. 

With a lump in my throat I notice several more names of mothers with their unborn children,  it's at this moment that I had an epiphany and all those statistics above about the "War on Terror" seem to slowly ebb away.

Time is a healer which helps to numb the pain and sadness of such tragedies like 9/11. But time also makes us forget, and as a public we have short memories. We are constantly bombarded with negative images on television and so death and wanton killing seem common place which makes us lose sight of the value of life.

After over 10 years of fighting, all this loss of life and all that money spent, are we any safer globally?

Would you have acted any differently to the Americans without the gift of hindsight?

The answers to the above questions are up for conjecture.

What I do know is, the brave men and women who've lost their lives in the "War on terror", did so to preserve a way of life. They died so we can continue to enjoy the freedoms and liberties we take as a given, and this is true whether you agree or disagree with government policy decisions that took us to war. 

"More inhumanity (to man) has been done by himself than any other of nature's causes".

Samuel Von Pufendorf, 1673

The Gordian knot

I took the above picture in the Durham Museum Omaha several weeks ago, it struck me then as it still does now as a massively profound statement. The above quote was taken from a speech by Franklin Delano Roosevelt on the 22nd of September, 1936.

Franklin D Roosevelt is the only American president elected to more than two terms. He is credited with helping the American people regain faith in themselves and he led the United States during a time of world wide economic depression and total war.

His tenure of the United States saw him issue new and seeping programmes of reform: social security, heavier taxes on the wealthy, new controls over banking and public utilities, and an enormous relief package programme for the unemployed. 

Sound relevant to today?

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself".

Another thought provoking statement from Franklin D Rooselvelt, taken from his inaugural address, Saturday, March 4th, 1933. And this brings me nicely onto the subject of this weeks blog. 

A few months ago, I went down to the local shooting range, I hired a SIG Sauer P226, purchased a few hundred rounds of ammunition and 4 paper targets. As a British citizen this is a real novelty and I wouldn't have been able to do this without prior training but as I'm active military this wasn't necessary. 

I thought then of blogging about gun culture in America and over the passed few months I've had discussions with Americans on this subject, but the recent shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary school have further polarised my mind on American gun laws. 


During the many discussions about the differences between American and British cultures, the subject of guns has been brought up on several occasions. Americans find it plainly bizarre that we don't generally own guns in the UK, they can't understand why we have such draconian laws to restrict the sale of firearms.  

In Nebraska guns are widely owned and used for sport. Fathers take their sons out hunting from a young age, they teach them how to handle, use, service and store guns safely. Any animals killed during the hunt are butchered and shared between family and friends. It really is an innocent past time, it's taken from the early pioneer days but it seems to still have a relevance today in this part of America.  

The mid-west is one thing, but what would you hunt with a gun in down town Chicago?

There is a deep rooted fear in the American psyche and I can't seem to precisely pin point where it comes from but I assure you it's there. One possible source of this fear could be the media.

Every time you turn the TV on, no matter what news channel you watch, there is always something that's about to kill or injure you, in the most horrific manner you can't even imagine. It's either the end of the world, there's a super duper storm cell about to obliterate the Eastern Seaboard or a foreign underground revolutionary movement is about to over throw the government.

It's no wonder people are scared, if you hear it enough sooner or later you'll begin to believe it.


A lack of regulation in America makes it possible to buy an assault rifle from a weekend gun show without any background checks. It's also possible to buy hundreds of rounds of ammunition for that rifle over the counter from a supermarket. These weapons have only one purpose, people don't go hunting waterfowl armed with an AR-15 and a high capacity magazine. These weapons are used by soldiers and special forces to fight wars, what purpose can they possibly serve in a "civilised" society?

In fact, the United States ranks around 10th for fire-arm related deaths, that probably doesn't sound too bad until you look at the countries further up the rankings. Countries like, Mexico, Swaziland and Honduras. Would you say America is on a similar social and economic footing as these countries? 

Another argument I've heard on the news over here is that the UK has a much higher violent crime rate than America, and they claim this is because gun laws in Britain make it almost impossible to own a fire-arm. If you actually look at the figures and read the criteria for violent crime, you'll see that in the UK more types of crime are classified as violent, this makes the statistics skewed when compared directly to the ones from the states. 

Any talk of gun regulation in American is seen as a direct attack on peoples fundamental rights and more importantly their right to bear arms. And it's usually at this point that the second amendment raises it's ugly head. 
It reads;

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

The second amendment was adopted in 1791 along with the rest of the bill of rights. Do we still need militias, don't they usually perform coups and overthrow governments on the horn of Africa?

From what I've seen, you can break people down into three categories.

1. Right wing conspiracy theorists who say the right to bear arms ensures maintenance of a free state and prevents the Federal Government from overstepping the bounds of authority.  They say assault rifles protect American citizens from a tyrannical government, and by tyrannical they mean the one they elected. There is no reasoning with these people and they say the only way to protect yourself from guns and gun crime is to have more guns. They would like to see former police officers in nursery schools armed to the teeth with semi-automatic weapons and say this is the only way to protect children. 

2. The average American family man who wants to be armed just incase. There's no malice in this, he just wants to be able to protect his family in any possible situation. 

3. The liberal who thinks it's time to try something new. Sales of guns have been steadily increasing and so has the numbers of fire-arm related deaths and it's not difficult to spot the correlation. The liberal has looked at countries like the UK which pretty much banned guns after the Dunblane school massacre and since then gun related crime has fallen year on year. The liberal questions what message you're sending to future generations when they turn at school only to be greeted by a heavily armed security guard. 

This blog could go on and on, it's such an emotive debate on both sides and with so much at stake.

I'll leave you with the words from of an American Icon and a great forward thinker of the 20th century. Marion Robert Morrison. (aka John Wayne) 

"Life is hard, it's harder if you're stupid"