Quote: Originally Posted by able
von Clausewitz put it this way, the military is the ultimate extension of diplomacy. Who are we to decide what other countries do to their own people? Then it shifts to civil rights, so where is this supposed to be going? During the 30s, the Spanish civil war was raging, and unlike today, the young men had the courage of their convictions, started their own battallions and fought in the war. More and more, I notice that todays young men are content to have strong opinions and then allow others to fight the battles. If you care enough to have an opinion, then you should care enough to bear arms. Having been in the military, and knowing how short the half life of the public's appreciation, I feel sorry for the young men who are dying for causes that won't even be remembered in five years. If someone believes that we should interfere in other countries affairs, then by God you better get involved, wars don't need cheerleaders they need battle hardened veterans. Now, on to civil rights, if there is injustice to some, then it is only a matter of time before it will be injustice for all. Don't discuss it, get off your butt and do something. High minded principles sound great but if you don't do something, then nothing happens.
Resorting to military force is a sign of failed diplomacy. It means the adversaries failed to come to a mutually acceptable agreement which avoids war. War is risky and its results are uncertain. One side or both are going to come out of war with less than they had going in. A diplomatic settlement which results in a win-win solution is predictably a winning solution for both sides.
Many people volunteer to fight when they believe in the cause strongly enough. The first post in this string...
...links to amazing footage by a couple of brave Americans who risked their safety to fight non-violently against Israel's violent and ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine of Palestinians.
While indivuals may be intelligent, people as a group are stupid and easily manipulated. The build up to the Iraq war is a good example. There never was any solid evidence supporting the American government's accusations that Iraq possessed WMDs or was working with al Qaeda. Yet it was easy for the people who control the media to convince the mob through fear and patriotism to support lynching Saddam Hussein.
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
The mob never thought too hard about what they were told about Iraq before the war. The media told us that thinking would have been unpatriotic and dangerous. But as more of American's finest come home in wooden boxes, more people are beginning think. More people are beginning to see that war involves more killing and destruction than they originally thought.
Images were available soon after the war began, but most Americans never saw them:
WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES OF THE US LED INVASION OF IRAQ:
If those images were shown by the media, then more people would have started thinking sooner. But what the media tells us is based more on furthering the agenda of our leaders, rather than actually informing us, provoking intelligent discussion or critical thought.
People should have known that death and destruction are consequences of war. But few people considered that.
That's not to say the Iraq war has been a complete failure. Success depends on how its measured. If you look at how many people have died and will die, then this war appears to have been an unmitigated disaster. But if you look at how much profit this war generates for corporations (which rebuild oil infrastructure, sell arms, offer mercenary services...) then the Iraq war is a resounding success.
Halliburton stock since March 2003:
The Iraq war is also another example of how people still do volunteer to fight, when they believe the cause is just. Look at this war from an Iraqi insurgent viewpoint. I doubt many fight for profit. Most are probably volunteers. Many of them have probably suffered personally as a result of the invasion and their motivation is to rid their nation of hostile foreigners intent on stealing their nation's oil wealth.
By the way, I believe the Iraqi people could defeat the hostile foreigners through non-violent means. It would take longer, but would have resulted in far fewer deaths. The Iraqi people could have used Ghandi-like tactics to march on and take over Iraq's oil facilities. Once the profit disappears, so do the foreigners.
Last edited by earth_as_one; Apr 30th, 2007 at 09:02 AM..