[Peace-discuss] Mort's comments

[Morton K. Brussel]

Thanks Bob for your efforts to try to explain and understand. I  
append some responses to your thoughts.  --Mort

On Apr 14, 2006, at 11:05 AM, Bob Illyes wrote:

> Being a soldier, like being a policeman, is a legitimate career
> choice, Mort. The legitimate purpose is to protect the peace by
> preventing crime, both personal and international. In order to
> do this, they must be prepared on occasion to meet violence with
> violence, which is why they carry and sometimes use guns.
> When they are used for aggressive purpose instead, it is to the
> political leadership that one must look for blame, and to the
> people who back that leadership.

I would say that the blame is shared. Individual responsibility ought  
to count for something. I didn't think Lt. Calley should be let off.  
As for the analogy between policemen and military service, I would  
say that it has been rare that the military has played a useful  
defensive role. Mostly, it has been the opposite. I might add that  
the police, although helping children cross the street is the image  
they like to present, often is an agent of repressive state power.  
For example, consider all the anti-war demonstrations where the  
police have "controlled the crowds".

>
> Soldiers and police are scarcely angels. None of us are, and they
> are as a group no better or worse than any of the rest of us.
> Most of them, like most of us, entered their line of work with
> reasonably good intentions and with some trust that they would
> not be misused. They are being misused in Iraq, and they were
> misused in Vietnam, with awful consequences. The returning
> veterans who have sold out to evil are in the minority. Most
> are reasonably decent people who have been thrown into a situation
> that no one should ever be thrown into, and are seriously
> traumatized by the experience. They deserve our kindness, not our
> contempt.

Do you have good data on this? I think that the group "buddy"  
mentality tends to take over in military service. The percentage of  
antiwar Iraq vets, so far as I can discern, is sadly small.
>
> If we are to use the referenda we just got on the ballot to
> advantage, we must use them as a starting point of a conversation
> with the other side. If we demonize them, this conversation will
> not happen and no minds will be changed.

I don't believe in a generalization that would lead to demonizing a  
whole group. Moreover, "demonizing" is not the appropriate word;  
there are alternatives to either demonizing or cheering. Just tell it  
like it is. The point is that some/many have gone along with dreadful  
actions, and who knows what fraction of them regret having  
participated? Of course we should welcome those who now see the war  
as wrong.
>
> If you've read the stuff I write for the Public i, you'll see that
> my main concern is attacks on the Bill of Rights, particular the
> First Amendment. This concerns me much more that war. There has
> been (as you know) a long-term systematic attack on the First
> Amendment that has its roots in McCarthy. We would not be in
> Iraq now if the press had not failed us. I think that direct
> democracy may be our best bet, and the referenda give us a fine
> opportunity to have a conversation that is long overdue regarding
> the war, the press, the constitution, and the actual intentions
> of our representatives.
>
> One must not forget that the people are sovereign, that they hold
> real and ultimate power. We can only be ruled by the few if they
> can divide us. What we need to do is connect, not demonize each
> other. The administration knows this, and their intent is division.
> If we play into their hands, they will win. Perhaps they will, but
> I believe the ball is now in our court. Will we use this advantage
> wisely?

Connect to backers of the war and occupation? What price unity?

>
> Bob
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss