Hallo zusammen,

hier publiziere ich die E.Mail meines amerikanischen Freundes Ross Cagan (mit Erlaubnis), der uns eindrucksvoll die derzeitige Gemütslage in Amerika vor Augen führt. Seine Schwester war am Ort des Geschehens und wäre beinahe von aufklatschenden Menschen, die aus großer Höhe gesprungen waren, erschlagen worden. Ich versuche hier sinngemäß, seine wichtigsten Aussagen auf Deutsch zusammenzufassen.

Obwohl Ross nicht sonderlich mag wie Bush redet, ist er beeindruckt davon wie Bush handelt. Es wird keinen Schnellschuß geben (obwohl dies den Terroristen Zeit gegeben hat, ihre Camps zu verlegen). Bush hat sich durch den Besuch von Moscheen sehr stark dafür gemacht, Moslems nicht mit Terroristen gleichzusetzen - und obwohl Bush den Begriff "Kreuzzug" verwendet hat (was nur deutlich macht, dass er sich meistens blamiert, wenn er spontan den Mund aufmacht), gibt es keinerlei Anzeichen dafür, dass die US den Konflikt als einen Konflikt der Religionen ansehen. Der Konflikt ist eher ein Konflikt zwischen Werten. Man sollte nicht auf einem so falsch gebrauchten Wort herumreiten, dabei könnte man leicht die wirklich drohenden Gefahren aus den Augen verlieren. Für die US ist der letzte Anschlag einer in einer Kette von vielen, die bisher allerdings immer im Ausland auf amerikanische Ziele gerichtet waren.

Ross hofft, dass wir niemals die Fähigkeit verlieren werden, entsetzt und empört zu sein über die Entführung vollbesetzter Flugzeuge, dem Durchschneiden der Kehlen von Piloten und Stewardessen und (nach vier Jahren sorgfältiger Planung) der Steuerung dieser Flugzeuge in Hochhäuser, um die Anzahl der zivilen Toten zu maximieren. Falls Afghanistan weiterhin willens ist, Dutzende von Trainingscamps für solche Mörder zu unterhalten, muss es die Konsequenzen tragen. Sie sind das einzige Land, das solche Camps offen duldet.

Einen Monat vor den Anschlägen gab es Hinweise, dass in den afghanischen Camps mit biologischen Waffen experimentiert wurde. Obwohl diese Hinweise indirekt sind und sich auf den versuchten Erwerb entsprechender Reagenzien beziehen, darf nicht daran gezweifelt werden, dass Terroristen, die belebte Hochhäuser zum Einsturz bringen, keinerlei Skrupel haben würden, noch extremere Methoden anzuwenden.

Jedes Land, auch die US, haben schreckliche Dinge in ihrer Geschichte getan. Das ist aber ein armseliges Argument, in der jetzigen Situation nicht zu handeln. Ross erwartet (verlangt) von seiner Regierung, dass sie zurückschlägt. Es ist klar, dass Nichthandeln mehr Menschenleben kosten würde als Handeln. Er schließ mit den Worten: Manche Dinge sind einfach falsch. Sie nicht zu ändern, ist eines davon. Dann entschuldigt er sich noch für seine Emotionen.

Hier das Original:

Hi Karl,

I was thinking about your email; a few thoughts and observations from an American on recent events. You are correct that the US should use an intelligent reply and not simply start bombing any Muslim target it can find. To the credit of our government, they have been taking their time to investigate and present their case; nothing has happened yet even though it has given time for prime suspects (read: Bin Laden) to dissemble their camps and move away. Furthermore, Bush (who I very much dislike, incidentally) has been terrific in aggressively visiting Mosques in this country and declaring that any harassment of Muslims or Arabs will not be tolerated. In fact, considering the anger in this country, remarkably few instances of harassment have occurred. And although Bush has used the word "crusade" (thus proving once again his inability to speak spontaneously without embarrassing himself), I haven't seen any evidence that the US views recent events as a religion-to-religion conflict. Most Americans simply ignore the details of what Bush says. Instead, recent events are clearly viewed here as a conflict between values.

For some to focus on a particular word used by Bush is really missing the reality of how Americans are reacting to these attacks; it seems like an easy way to skip attending to some uncomfortable but growing realities. The terrorist act last week is being seen in the context of the bombing of the same World Trade Center 8 years ago, the bombing of multiple American embassies three years ago (both of which led to considerable loss of life), and the attempted attacks targeting Americans in Jordon during the millenium celebration (which would, if not found out and stopped, have been killed hundreds). America is being seen as the standard bearer of a particular way of life and values, and war has been declared; sadly, other countries will be targeted as well as the targets expand.

I hope we never lose our capacity to be outraged at acts such as hijacking several airplanes with hundreds of people, slitting the throats of the pilots and stewardesses, and (after four years of careful training) flying these planes into buildings to maximize civilian deaths. This is morally wrong. My sisterÐ who works in the adjacent buildingÐ was nearly hit by bodies falling from the sky as people chose between being incinerated and crushed. She appears to have lost several work friends in the building. If AfghanistanÐ both for financial and religious reasonsÐ is still willing to harbor dozens of training camps whose sole purpose is to kill 'infidel' Westerners after such acts, then they choose to accept the consequences. They appear to be perhaps the only country that would openly accept such camps. And note that most of the terrorists that hijacked the planes were not poor (in fact, they were firmly middle class), suggesting the struggle is not simply a financial one. It is an ideological one.

Based on these events, it appears that the aggression and boldness of Muslim extremists is rising. What to do? A month before the recent attack, in hearings investigating the embassy bombings, evidence was presented that the camps in Afghanistan were experimenting with biological warfare. This evidence is at the moment indirectÐ mostly a lot of dead livestock and some evidence of attempts to purchase the reagentsÐ but if these extremists are willing to take down crowded buildings with crowded planes, why should I expect they would hesitate at using even more extreme measures? A fear of killing too many innocent lives?

You mentioned Germany has had experience with war. Every country has done terrible things in its past, including the US. But this is a poor excuse for not acting, as is evidenced by the thousands of dead Muslims in Bosnia. I sincerely hope that no innocent civilians get hurt in the US response, but I am not naive enough to think that many lives will not be placed at risk. But it is now clear that not acting will place far more lives at risk. I'm not sure simply prosecuting a couple of participants, even Bin Laden himself (assuming he had a hand in it, and it appears he did) is an appropriate or useful response to a large network of terrorists that have killed thousands of civilians with a steady rate of attacks and appear to be getting better at it. Many good people were killed in the attack, my sister was nearly so, and I'm not embarrassed to say I am appalled and angry and that I fully expect the US to fight back. Some things are simply wrong. Not acting to change them is one of them.

Sorry for the rambling.

Best regards, Ross

Diese gemässigte und vernünftige Ansicht eines Amerikaners begrüsse ich sehr.

Ich verweise auf meine Stellungsnahme im Forum "Allgemeine Themen/Was können wir tun?"

Schorsch