Is History Amoral?

The Egyptian Gazette :
http://213.158.162.45/~egyptian/index.php?action=news&id=14635&title=Impact%20of%20war%20on%20language%20%28115%29.html

Impact of war on language (115)
By Sami El-Shahed-The Gazette Online
Tuesday, January 25, 2011 02:29:43 PM

Vietnam War poetry(iiv) ‘Bone in the Soil’: History,’ Anne Michaels writes in Fugitive Pieces, ‘is amoral: events occurred. But memory is moral; what we consciously remember is what our conscience remembers.’ However, it is humans as moral or immoral agents who fashion history.

Michaels indeed highlights the vital notion of moral memory ascribed to and valued in the poems of many American veteran representations of Vietnam.

     These poems are located within personal traumas, guilt, and desires, but they also address the memory and conscience of a nation that continually seems to dismember those harsh and traumatic memories, said Professor Subarno Chatarji, an authority regarding Vietnam War literature (referred to in the previous article of this series.)

I think the point made "it is humans as moral or immoral agents who fashion history" refutes the point made earlier (without proof) that "History... is amoral".
History is as moral or amoral as we make it ourselves. At no time does History become amoral because the tenses of the verbs we use have changed from "we are doing" to "we have done". Therefore, there is no escape from the iniquities of the past, and the sins of the father may indeed be visited (in a sense) upon the heads of their children.
Just as we take pride in the good in history, we must deal with the evil, for I get the impression that Ms. Michael's point was "History is amoral, thus we- the moral agents - must constantly turn our minds to it and deal with it in poetry, writing, debate, etc."  However, this implies we may indeed - if we so choose - ignore it, just as we ignore past genocides here and there. There is a difference between History's crying out for attention, and History's fury and revenge at being scorned. 
I do not believe we have an option to forget: just as body and mind and soul are one entity, so are past, present, and future. We have no option since History is moral and we are moral agents, and as moral agents, we cannot escape the pull of History's gravity, willing/unwilling. If History was not moral, how would one explain right now the fact that moral men and women can come together and create immorality, such as the Iraq War (which is not over yet, in my opinion)? You cannot, and all there is left is a mess of opinions and a constant wondering what to do.

History once again attempted to become amoral in the years 2002 to 2009 approximately. It did not pull off the stunt successfully, just as it did not come to an end as Professor Fukuyama had postulated in the 1990's. 

--