Replies to post #1390 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[Mr. Ed]

jbennett-nothing changes but the names-

“The trouble is that when American dollars earn only six percent over here, they get restless and go overseas to get 100 percent. The flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

“I wouldn’t go to war again as I have done to defend some lousy investment of the bankers. We should fight only for the defense of our home and the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

“There isn’t a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It had its ‘finger men’ to point out enemies, its ‘muscle men’ to destroy enemies, its ‘brain men’ to plan war preparations and a ‘Big Boss’ — supernationalistic capitalism.

“I spent 33 years in the Marines. Most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism.

“I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenue in. I helped in the rape of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.

“War is a racket.”

— General Smedley D. Butler
former U.S. Marine Commandant
in Common Sense
November 1935

[goodluck]

JB,
I had a nearly identical experience in the 60s, though I studied the Vietnam story in high school to discover what a disgrace that war was. I had the previous summer at summer camp (I was 15 at the time) called my counselor a "coward" for being upset at being drafted; I told him I would be proud to serve in the war. He was really very good with me, didn't take it personally, and told me a few things about Vietnam. I didn't believe what he said, and the next year (1966, I think it was) in a US history class, did a long research project on the history of the country in the 20th C in order to answer him. I still blush with shame when I think of things I said to him.

"War is for the lazy who want it all, do not care one whit for those soldiers who fight it and will not go to the trouble of finding a better solution." Having studied much more history since those days, I think you are wrong about this, though I wish you were right. It may be true sometimes, but I think it is even more nefarious, war is not simply for the "lazy" but for arrogant and deluded people who believe that they can control events, that they are actually "powerful" in some sense. They aren't simpy lazy, at least not in a simple straightforward sense (though their drum-beating backers may well be). These need to study people like Machiavelli and Clausewitz, who came to know in their bones how unintended consequences (what the ancients called "fate" or "chance", and what Machiavelli called "Fortuna"), who understood the dangers of military power and complex events. It is the only realism that is worth knowing at the end of the day. Tolstoy is another master of it, but the deluded self-styled realists who believe that military power can control matters would never be patient or respectful enough to learn from a pacifist like him.

[sarai]

In the 1960's, I believe the saying was.....

"Question Authority Before It Questions You"

Timeless wisdom that is a requirement of, and responsibility of continued freedom.... And there is a cynicism now similar to the cynicism of the Vietnam era too. There is a general and pervasive distrust of business and government, and authority in general. We just haven't found the same sense of social responsibility, not yet..... But we'll get there, and eventually we'll take our own role in government more seriously, and we'll hold authority appropriately accountable. I think we are still early in our "Question Authority" cycle...

Have a happy!! :)