[Peace-discuss] Re: misgivings on Iraq War: A Four Year Reflection

[Thomas Ayala]

I agree with Robert Naiman.  As someone who has spent time in a war  
zone, I couldn't wait to get back to the United States of America.   
My grandfather died in Korea, and I proudly display his American flag  
in a memorial case in my living room.  When Mexican-Americans proudly  
wave their flags in Chicago every May and September, do you think  
they are supporting the PRI, Vicente Fox or Felipe Calderon?  Of  
course not!!  They are supporting their people, their indigenous  
heritage, their language, their religion, their cuisine--the flag has  
become more of a representation of their culture, not a show of  
support for the government.

I think it is time to stop this bickering and unite as a coalition  
behind efforts to stop the war.  I am proud, as a veteran and member  
of Iraq Veterans Against the War ( and who was actually in combat) to  
support the College Democrats and their efforts to end the war, no  
matter if I disagree with their tactics.  It is not my place to tell  
the college democrats how to run their anti-war efforts.  I am just  
so glad they are doing it.  Don't let the fringe far left crowd deter  
you from your efforts.

I just go an email showing the original email by Martin Smith, of the  
local socialist organization, was posted to a listserv to a lot of  
other community members.  I think that is a shame.

Allison we (nearly everyone on the left, except those on the fringe  
left) support your efforts to end this war, by any means necessary.

Thanks
Thomas
_____________
Thomas Ayala
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English
Center for Writing Studies
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

c: 217.840.6973
h: 217.398.5624




On Mar 21, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:

I was very disturbed to receive this email.

People may have legitimate differences over the proper use of the
flag, but organizing a campaign against the College Democrats for
using flags as part of a memorial to U.S. troops who have died in the
war on the grounds that the flag is intrinsically tied to militarism
is sectarian and extreme.

I would ask Mr. Smith to desist from this campaign, and focus his
efforts on working constructively with other organizations to end the
war, rather than attacking organizations which have a long track
record of advocating for peace and justice in this community.

Robert Naiman

On 3/21/07, msmith46 at uiuc.edu <msmith46 at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> (please see bottom of email for information on how to voice your  
> concern to the College Democrats on their proposed U.S. flag  
> display on the quad)
> ******************************
>
> Dear Allison of the College Democrats and all student leaders:
>
> My name is Martin Smith and I am with Iraq Veterans Against the War  
> at UIUC.
>
> I want to share with you my misgivings about the proposed display  
> by the College Democrats to have 3,223+ U.S. flags in the quad to  
> commemorate the U.S. troops that have died in the war.
>
> First, when troops die, families are given a flag by the government  
> and a flag is draped over a given soldiers' coffin.  To me, this is  
> the ultimate act of hypocrisy by our government.  We, the antiwar  
> movement, need a symbol that does not mimic and copy what our own  
> government does.  That is, we need a symbol that is clear and  
> distinct from our government who claims to "support our troops" but  
> in reality sends them to an illegal and immoral war to die, only to  
> return to failed VA hospitals or worse yet, gives them a flag to  
> mark their ultimate sacrifice.
>
> You see, in my opinion, Peace is NOT Patriotic and having the flag  
> at an antiwar event is a concession to the war drive.    The flag  
> became inescapably identified with militarism long ago.
>
> In his successful campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in Indiana in  
> 1898, Albert Beveridge gave a notorious speech called "The March of  
> the Flag" that called for the annexation of the Philippines. "[W]e  
> are of the ruling race of the world," Beveridge declared. "Ours is  
> the blood of government; ours the heart of dominion; ours the brain  
> and genius of administration…Will you remember that we do but what  
> our fathers did?--we but pitch the tents of liberty further  
> westward, further southward--we only continue the march of the flag!"
>
> As well, the U.S. flag can't be symbol of justice and freedom when  
> it was used to justify the genocidal conquest of Native Americans,  
> the seizure of half of Mexico and the slavery and racism suffered  
> by African Americans.
>
> The great abolitionist Frederick Douglass noted that Blacks had to  
> struggle for the right to vote despite fighting under the American  
> flag in the Civil War--while ex-Confederates received pardons. "Do  
> you intend to sacrifice the very men who have come to the rescue of  
> your banner in the South and incurred the lasting displeasure of  
> their masters thereby?" Douglass asked. "Do you intend to sacrifice  
> them and reward your enemies? Do you mean to give your enemies the  
> right to vote and take it away from your friends?"
>
> A century later, African Americans were still struggling--and  
> dying--for the right to vote. "Being born here in America doesn't  
> make you an American," the Black revolutionary Malcolm X said in a  
> 1964 speech. "I'm one of the 22 million Black people who are the  
> victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million Black people who are  
> the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So I'm  
> not standing here speaking to you as an American or a patriot or a  
> flag-saluter or a flag-waver--no, not I. I'm speaking as a victim  
> of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the  
> victim. I don't see any American dream; I see an American nightmare."
>
> Finally, how can the flag of the government that supported death  
> squads and dictators from Latin America to the Middle East to  
> Africa be seen in the Third World as anything but a symbol of  
> imperialist domination?
>
> S. Brian Wilson, a Vietnam War veteran who became a peace activist,  
> wrote an essay on how he changed his view of the flag while reading  
> the military newspaper Stars and Stripes. "There was a story about  
> an arrest for flag burning somewhere in the United States," Wilson  
> wrote. "I had recently experienced the horror of seeing numerous  
> bodies of young women and children that were burned alive in a  
> small Delta village devastated by napalm…I wondered why it was okay  
> to burn innocent human beings 10,000 miles from my hometown, but  
> not okay to burn a piece of cloth that was symbolic of the country  
> that had horribly napalmed those villagers.
>
> "Something was terribly wrong with the Cold War rhetoric of  
> fighting communism that made me question what our nation stood for.  
> There was a grand lie, an American myth, that was being  
> fraudulently preserved under the cloak of our flag. So when I see  
> the flag and think of the Declaration of Independence, instead of  
> the United States of America, I see the United Corporations of  
> America; I see the blood and bones of people all over the globe who  
> have been dehumanized, then exterminated by its imperialism; and I  
> see a symbol that represents a monstrous lie maintained by  
> excessive, deadly force. It makes me feel sick and ashamed."
>
> That is why those of us opposed to Washington's war must march  
> under a different banner--one that stands for international  
> solidarity and justice.
>
> In the final analysis, utilizing the flag is problematic because it  
> calls for unity with the very people who put soldiers and troops in  
> harm's way in Iraq.  It calls for unity with the people who promote  
> anti-Arab racism.  It calls for unity with all the pro-war people.
>
> I prefer that you consider utilizing a non-nationalistic symbol in  
> your display.  Utilize dogtags, utilize boots, utilize cardboard  
> cut-outs of tombs.  As well, consider some memorial symbol for all  
> the deaths of Iraqi people as well.  We cannot only mourn for  
> American troops but must mourn all the innocent lives that have  
> been lost by this illegal and immoral war.
>
> I realize that this may be costly.  However, you don't have to have  
> 3,223 symbols (the number of casualties as of this 3/21/07) or one  
> million plus symbols for Iraqis.  Even just 322 of whatever non- 
> nationalistic symbol, with each representing a hundred, would be  
> powerful.  It is really dangerous to merely go for the cheapest  
> cost, i.e. small flags, without considering the overall message  
> that you are promoting.
>
> Please consider NOT utilizing the flag as your display.  Because if  
> you do, your message will be misconstrued and your antiwar position  
> will be mistaken to represent a pro-war position that supports of  
> all the past wrongs our country has engaged in.
>
> As such, Iraq Vets Against the War will have to consider rescinding  
> our endorsement of this event.  We will not support a pro-war  
> display.  The flag does not pull people together--it divides people!
>
> respectfully submitted,
> Martin Smith
>
> p.s. I encourage other student leaders to stand with me in  
> requesting the Democrats reconsider the symbolism and message of  
> their display.  Please voice your dissent to Allison of the College  
> Democrats at: lale at uiuc.edu
>
> If you have any further questions, please call me:
> Martin Smith
> 217 649-8830
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20070321/50106a46/attachment-0001.html