Why We Fight by Eugene Jarecki

[Blotan Hunka]

BTW Vietnam was what, 30-40 years ago? Things have CHANGED man. :uhyeah:

 

[Makalakumu]

Dude..grandpa and his stories dont give you any more understanding about being a soldier than reading black belt magazine gives you clout to talk about being a ninja.

Right. I suppose my grandfathers', my fathers, and many others in my families' observations don't count.

Come on, BH.

We just have different views of what this place is all about. Being a soldier has little to do with this.

I think that Ike had a point. The unwarrented influence of the Military Industrial Complex is something we need to be aware of. And, IMHO, I think we are seeing exactly what Ike warned us against, all those years ago.

 

[Makalakumu]

BTW Vietnam was what, 30-40 years ago? Things have CHANGED man. :uhyeah:

They certainly have. Patriotism is now a product that is sold in the form of volunteer service to the military.

I think this is really sad. We should all love our country and want to serve. However, many of us have learned that you can't TRUST it enough to want to do that.

That is the lesson of the Veitnam era.

 

[qizmoduis]

Right. I suppose my grandfathers', my fathers, and many others in my families' observations don't count.

Come on, BH.

We just have different views of what this place is all about. Being a soldier has little to do with this.

I think that Ike had a point. The unwarrented influence of the Military Industrial Complex is something we need to be aware of. And, IMHO, I think we are seeing exactly what Ike warned us against, all those years ago.

The problem that you're dealing with, Upnorth, is one of extreme romanticization of warfare and "The Patriotic Warrior". The Republicans have been progagandizing themselves as the party of patriotic warriors for so long that there is now a subculture on the right that worships the soldier as an icon of American patriotism.

Viewpoints of non-soldiers don't count, and if you are a soldier but don't adhere to the iconic stereotype marketed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and the conservative idiocracy, then you are written off as a traitor or a flip-flopper or a coward or as padding your political resume.

These people don't hear the cries of the wounded and dying; they don't see the tears of those left behind. They don't smell the stench of rotting flesh and voided bowels and clotted blood, and they don't want to know about the children whose fathers (and sometimes mothers) will never come home again. Or the ones who do come home, having left pieces of themselves, physical and mental, on the battlefields. The ones who are thrown in the gutter and forgotten by the administration because wounded soldiers are no longer romantic enough for them.

These people remember soldiering as Sly Stallone invading Afghanistan and taking on the Soviet invaders single-handedly, or as Chuck Norris invading Vietnam and (again single-handedly) taking on the entire Vietnamese army.

I'm not a soldier either, and never have been. But my father was. He was a medic (OK, Air Force, so technically not a soldier, but you get the idea) during the Korean war, and he can tell you about the wailing, and the stench, and the rot, and the blood, and the missing pieces.

My wife is a refugee from Vietnam, and she can tell you about the bombs, and the screams of other kids dying because someone attacked a full movie theater that she just missed getting into.

Soldiering is not a noble profession. It is ugly, nasty, horrifying, and dehumanizing. Sometimes it is necessary, and those who do server need and deserve our support and respect. But the sheer mountainous arrogance of the cabal that is in charge of our current administration who view people's lives, soldiers' and foreign civilian's lives, as more tools to be thrown away so they can pretend to be little kids playing in the sandboxes of nation-building is beyond breathtaking. They selfishly and stupidly squander the lives of kids who volunteered (for all sorts of reasons, not necessarily the politically corrent one) to serve, just to satisfy their own desires. To top that off, they then cyncally use their deaths as a political tool to gain and maintain power.

Over the past twelve years and especially since 2001, Republicans in general and the right-wing part in particular have proven themselves to be unqualified to lead this country. It will take us decades to undo the damage they have done, both internal and external.

One thing for sure, though, is the soldier-worship has to stop, and be replaced by true respect. That won't happen until and unless Republicans are completely removed from power. We're off to a good start with the past election cycle. Let's hope we can take care of the rest of them in 2008.

 

[crushing]

qizmoduis,

Thank you for that very graphic and sobering post.

With both major parties rationalizing their own wars and various military strikes when their respective party is in power, how do you see the Democratic Party doing much different, especially considering how militaristic the 1990s were. I can see the Libertarian and Green parties being different, but not so much with Democratic party.

It seems, independent of the party to which he belongs, each president feels the need to have his own personal Hitler to defeat and one party's Hussein is another parties Milosevic. One party's Afghanistan is the other party's Vietnam. Maybe they are compelled to have their 'Hitler' for the reasons expressed in the film "Why We Fight", and not the WMD or humanitarian line we are being fed.

Additionally, the romantization the you spoke of worked very well against the Republicans in the recent election as the Democratic party did a great job of recruiting war vets to run against Republicans. Does this not also feed the romanization? How about the noble war Vietnam hero Sen. John Kerry v. the AWOL coward Mr. Bush and the whole Republican 'chickenhawk' meme.



Also, because I am a Gulf War veteran, you should put more stock in what I am saying about these issues. Just kidding, of course.

 

[Makalakumu]

The last two posts were wonderful! Soldier Worship is a symptom of the Military Industrial Complex. It is nothing but a marketing scheme. Beat the drums. Beat the drums.

Crushing, your point about the dems is very pointed. Despite the fact that they have a large "peace wing" they support the system just as much as the republicans.

I think we'll see some more evidence of this now that they some power in the government.

 

[qizmoduis]

qizmoduis,

Thank you for that very graphic and sobering post.

With both major parties rationalizing their own wars and various military strikes when their respective party is in power, how do you see the Democratic Party doing much different, especially considering how militaristic the 1990s were. I can see the Libertarian and Green parties being different, but not so much with Democratic party.

It seems, independent of the party to which he belongs, each president feels the need to have his own personal Hitler to defeat and one party's Hussein is another parties Milosevic. One party's Afghanistan is the other party's Vietnam. Maybe they are compelled to have their 'Hitler' for the reasons expressed in the film "Why We Fight", and not the WMD or humanitarian line we are being fed.

Additionally, the romantization the you spoke of worked very well against the Republicans in the recent election as the Democratic party did a great job of recruiting war vets to run against Republicans. Does this not also feed the romanization? How about the noble war Vietnam hero Sen. John Kerry v. the AWOL coward Mr. Bush and the whole Republican 'chickenhawk' meme.

We'll have to wait and see how things go with the Dems in power now and hopefully more so after 2008. I voted for Democrats and am a registered Democrat because the party in general supports issues I believe in strongly: Civil rights, personal freedom, social equality (or at least less government supported stratification), environment, etc. I am what the media calls a "values" voter, but who then failed to understand that "values" aren't defined by the nutbar right-wing power-brokers. For me, the Iraq debacle was just the tip of an OBVIOUS iceberg of nastiness and incompetence. Personally, I find it very sad that it took Iraq for a majority of voters in this country to finally see it. And I find it sad that still so many Republicans won their elections.

I'm hoping the current crop of Democrats remains mostly uncorrupted for at least a decade or two. That's not really long enough, but these things go in cycles, excepting of course the Republican takeover in 1992, which started out corrupt and went downhill from there.

Also, because I am a Gulf War veteran, you should put more stock in what I am saying about these issues. Just kidding, of course.

I worship the very ground you walk on! :rofl:

 

[Cryozombie]

How many more times can you say Military industrial Complex?

You sound like a parrot.
​

 

[crushing]

We'll have to wait and see how things go with the Dems in power now and hopefully more so after 2008. I voted for Democrats and am a registered Democrat because the party in general supports issues I believe in strongly: Civil rights, personal freedom, social equality (or at least less government supported stratification), environment, etc. I am what the media calls a "values" voter, but who then failed to understand that "values" aren't defined by the nutbar right-wing power-brokers. For me, the Iraq debacle was just the tip of an OBVIOUS iceberg of nastiness and incompetence. Personally, I find it very sad that it took Iraq for a majority of voters in this country to finally see it. And I find it sad that still so many Republicans won their elections.

Those are the same reasons I chose to remain independent from the parties. I feel that the major parties pinch us from each side when it comes to our rights.

I'm hoping the current crop of Democrats remains mostly uncorrupted for at least a decade or two. That's not really long enough, but these things go in cycles, excepting of course the Republican takeover in 1992, which started out corrupt and went downhill from there.

It was 1994 and like the Democratic Party takeover this year, I don't think the Republican takeover started out corrupt. But, the cyclical nature you mention does have to the tendency of that power to corrupt.

I worship the very ground you walk on! :rofl:

The ground is definately more worthy than I.

 

[qizmoduis]

It was 1994 and like the Democratic Party takeover this year, I don't think the Republican takeover started out corrupt.

Heh. Yeah, I always get 1992 and 1994 confused with that "Contract with America" idiocy. I'll get it right eventually. I think I just have a tendency to wrap things around decade starts and go downhill from there.