It is hard enough to lay the fallen to rest when the combat is righteous, a genuine defense of freedom. It is almost impossible to do so when the blood of soldiers is used to feed the whores of commerce and national pride. How long will it take before the politicians understand that while an army can suppress violence with a greater degree of more controlled violence an army really cannot make peace, because peace and lack of violence are not really the same thing?
Perhaps we should begin to remember the fallen in other "wars:" the Triangle Shirtwaist and Bangladeshi fire victims; those brave union folk who have been killed while striking; the ones who died in the Occupy camps in various cities, and folks like Karen Silkwood who only wanted to expose evil... Such fallen folks also gave their lives to defend peace and freedom.
ReplyDeleteEqually indeed... not all wars are contests of destruction.
Deletewhat's a 'War on Terror'? it's been a puzzling decade...
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what that is any more than you are, pip, but I predict it'll be no more successful than the "war on drugs" or the "war on poverty."
Deletehow 'bout a 'war on wars'?
DeleteNo. War cannot be fought with the weapons and tactics of war; the only way we'll end war is by making it unnecessary, and the only way to do that is to convince humanity that they don't need it. Of course, that requires a heart change...
Deleteyou mean 'NEGOTIATION'? horrors!
ReplyDeletebook recommendation: 'The Righteous Mind' by Jonathan Haidt.
Jochanaan, i guarantee you will find it logically fascinating, and an advancement in your understanding of your own, and everyone else's, 'human nature'.
pip
I may have to find a copy!
Delete