.: rambles --> 09.18.01: letterman
I watched letterman last night. dave's opening words were honest and emotional; his q&a with dan rather was just bizarre, dan breaking into tears, God bless him, twice in the midst of sabre-rattling and persistent questions from dave about when we were going to start bombing, as though dan had spent the day sitting in national security briefings, and as though we knew for certain who attacked us last week, and dan completely on the same page. then regis came on and hit just the right note. I have new respect for all three men, as strange as that is to say.
I watched it after getting a heads up from metafilter, because I always miss the most impactive tv events, watching as rarely as I do (I haven't seen even one of bush's speeches, for example.) but it was unnerving to hear dan and dave talk on as if we knew who was to blame and both of them bent so on revenge. perhaps it's different if you actually live in new york.
I have a new sense that my way of thinking about this doesn't represent even half of the thinking in the US, as I had supposed it might, that I'm way, way off in left-field in my response. it scares me, and I can only hope that in washington there are clear heads carefully considering all of the facts and all of the options and all of the ramifications of all of the possible actions.
usually I care whether people act thoughtfully, but I no longer care why our leaders do what they do, only that they act deliberately and reasonably and with great care. if they avoid a war in afghanistan because they are afraid of another vietnam, I think that's a wonderful reason. my persistent sense is that we must be able to clearly demonstrate to the international community the guilt of whomever we identify as the mastermind of this tragedy, and that we must avoid endangering the lives of innocent citizens in our justice-seeking.
has it occurred to anyone that all of the perpetrators of this action might have died on those planes?