Illusory Victory

{source: The Telegraph}

"For me, this type of celebration would have been justifiable in only two circumstances: 1) if we had captured Bin Laden or 2) if we had somehow managed to “win” the war (ha). This event may have provided “closure” to some, but it’s essentially illusory– and we’re admitting this fact when we say it was a “symbolic victory.” Killing Bin Laden doesn’t hammer any nail into the terrorist coffin– in fact, I think it’s safe to say things are going to be even more volatile now than they were before. Someone else is going to try extra hard to step up to the plate in his absence.

And… killing Bin Laden doesn’t change the fact that we are fighting wars for extremely questionable reasons. Or the fact that we are fighting enemies that can’t ever be fully defeated.

I respect the vigils. I would have had more respect for the cheering and singing and the drunken antics if we had captured the man rather than put a bullet through his head. As it stands, all we are really celebrating is someone’s death (and for the record, I’m not one of those people who is saying, “he was a person too, it’s horrible to celebrate anyone’s death”– he was a bad guy. I’m not sad about it. But there’s still something morbid about the whole ordeal). If it feels like closure, it’s because it’s vengeance. It’s not because we won anything. We’re celebrating like we won because there isn’t going to be another V-J Day at the end of this thing (if we ever get there). There is no closure in this type of war– we’re celebrating because we know there won’t be a celebration.

(and because we want to feel like we did when Obama got elected)

But maybe I’m just cynical."

Reader comment from NYU Local