Surprise -- The Very Dark Side of U.S. History (WWII, war)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Civilians that get killed by an airstrike rarely get to cast their own ballots in a democracy. Of course, that won't stop their astonishingly corrupt leaders from casting the ballots on their behalf.
This military tradition has explicitly defended the selective use of terror, whether in suppressing Native American resistance on the frontiers in the 19th Century or in protecting U.S. interests abroad in the 20th Century or fighting the "war on terror" over the last decade.
I only skimmed the article. But the idea that there is a unifying doctrine or tenet to the way America fights wars, from the Civil War to the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, seems very stupid to me.
On the other hand, anything that challenges the notion that the U.S. is spreading freedom and democracy and gets people thinking is a good thing. All empires in history found good causes and noble ideals with which to cloak their self-interests.
The Greeks and the Romans brought civilization to the unruly barbarian hordes.
The Conquistadors came to the new world to save devil worshiping natives and bring them Catholicism.
The British brought enlightenment, education and railroads to the brown people. White mans burden and all.
The Americans, with their Manifest Destiny, were simply following Gods will in spreading across North America.
The Soviets exported the ideas of Communism to their neighbors.
Today, it is America again spreading freedom and democracy half way around the globe.
Soliders do what they are told. It is the policy makers that decide the course of action.
Some soldiers just say No, and unjust and meaningless wars end, as in Vietnam. Perhaps that is the only way they can end---our only hope.
Word hasn't fully leaked out yet, but it is my understanding that more and more soldiers in Iraq simply refused to obey orders, and their mid-level commanders simply didn't care. And another silly war simply ceased to be fought.
This isn't a surprise to anyone who's ever been to war. It's only those who have sat safely at home and never dared go into the breech who are surprised and shocked by what goes on in combat. The soldier knows it only too well.
"War is at its best barbarism."---W.T. Sherman
But, I must make a few comments about that article.
In the first place, the author seems to spend a great deal of time on Indonesia, as if we alone are responsible for having taught them how to do such things. Apparently, he thinks East Timor is directly attributable to US involvement when, in truth, we weren't the only ones who were assisting the Indonesian's nor were we the masters of anti-guerilla warfare. In fact, we didn't even invent the doctrine and you only have to look at the Old Testament to realize that.
Secondly, he does not mention the more commonly accepted style of warfare, such as during WWII, the early days of Korea and and countless other examples. In spite of the fact that civilians were routinely slaughtered in numbers far, far exceeding anything ever done in a counter-insurrgency scenario, they get barely a mention as if it's not something worth talking about, even though they were intentionally targeted. Nor does he note that such an application of industrial sized terror wasn't our idea to begin with. The use of maximum military power against the civilian population has been going on since the idea of warfare was born.
The author reminds me of a professor I had in college. He and I got into a heated debate about such things and, at the end, he stomped away declaring that I wasn't fit to talk to. He'd run out of defenses for his position, so he just left. He believed that there was a significant moral difference between wiping out an inhabited town with a rain of bombs from 30,000 and going in to do the job personally, on the ground. I did not see such a difference and forced him to confont the hypocrisy of his stance.
Not surprisingly, he had never left the safe, comfortable environs of the campus while I was just back from an overseas deployment in combat. We were as far apart in our beliefs as the east is from the west.
I think this lack of first-hand knowledge is what's behind the kind of Pollyanna image most people have of war and what soldiers do in their name.
Word hasn't fully leaked out yet, but it is my understanding that more and more soldiers in Iraq simply refused to obey orders, and their mid-level commanders simply didn't care. And another silly war simply ceased to be fought.
Some soldiers just say No, and unjust and meaningless wars end, as in Vietnam. Perhaps that is the only way they can end---our only hope.
Word hasn't fully leaked out yet, but it is my understanding that more and more soldiers in Iraq simply refused to obey orders, and their mid-level commanders simply didn't care. And another silly war simply ceased to be fought.
How about some specific,detailed, rock-solid evidence that this is occurring?
Well, I don't want to be cavalier about this, but the article elicited a big "So what?" from me. Put soldiers in combat situation, and you will have abuses like this. Part of training an 18-year-old boy to kill means dehumanizing the enemy, whether it's a soldier or the community from which he draws his support. Does it make it right? Hell no. But in any combat situation, abuses are going to happen.
And, to be honest, every extant nation today has some of this in its history. Heck, the Belgians' foray into the Congo make the Sand Creek massacre look like a Sunday school outing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I stopped reading here.
