 sj |
||
|
||
Anti-Conscription Movement
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: PeteBoom Date: 30 May 02 - 08:57 AM OK Hrothgar, I'll concede your point. Please substitute "western style democratic republic with representative governmental processes to exercise the will of the electorate or, depending on organizational structure, act on the behalf of the electorate as opposed to totalitarian/oligarchical/absolute-monarchy based authoritarian regime held in place by military power over its own people" in place of "free society". Thanks so much - Pete
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Steve in Idaho Date: 30 May 02 - 09:43 AM Let me clear here, once again, about where I stand on war and all it stands for. I oppose it. I have spent my life after my tour in Viet Nam being very active in opposing it. But I will not "chill" when some whiney ass hole denigrates those who made different choices. I have stated, and will state again, that I respect those fought against the war as much as those who fought in it. So I will say what I feel. And I'll do my best not to hold back *BG*. Spaw, Bobert, DougR, CarolC, Katlaughing, Justa Picker, and many others have different views on how this subject can be approached. I respect those views, and Spaw you are SOOOOO right - it does take both sides to change this craziness, and expect the same respect for my views and choices. I love this place and the people in it - it has helped more than any of you will ever know to be able to come to a table and discuss, and cuss, the bent up pieces of my life that evolved from serving in Viet Nam. I choose to be proud of my service - I'll be damned if I'll be ashamed of the ideology I took to the war and my participation in it under those same auspices. Bless you all on this Memorial Day - Say a prayer for those who are far away And most likely in harm's way Right or wrong they go believing their service will help others.
Steve |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: leprechaun Date: 30 May 02 - 09:58 AM I notice that when I see the word Guest, by itself, if I just click rapidly on the right mouse button a few times it makes this thread much more coherent. I think there are a few things worth dying for, but I'm only speculating because I haven't actually died yet. I think there are even fewer things worth killing for. But they exist. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST,Bill Kennedy Date: 30 May 02 - 10:34 AM if peace is the goal, war & violence can never be the means to attain that goal, it will never work. That means people need to take responsibility for their own government and its policies, that means reading, studying, researching, thinking, talking and deciding for oneself what is in the best interests of one's country and the world. Conscription should be resisted whenever possible. There is no 'honor' in just going along with the herd, not bucking the trend, entering the service and then getting killed somewhere. There is no 'honor' in accepting whatever story the news is feeding you about the 'enemy' and going off to kill them, and then being killed yourself. There is no 'honor', in and of itself, in just being killed in a war for any reason, combatant or non-combatant. There IS 'honor' in having examined the issues and deciding to join in a cause one believes in and being willing to fight for it. There IS 'honor' in behaving honorably in wartime situations, combatant and non-combatant. AND There IS 'honor', in and of itself, in refusing to join, refusing to fight, refusing to support, refusing to work in any role that supports war, and suffering the consequences, because that requires a decision. The largest most powerful conscripted army in the history of the world could not beat a small nation of volunteers who were defending their own country against an outside agressor allied to one side of a civil war. IMHO the reasons for our being in Vietnam were wrong, the reasons for our being in Kuwait were wrong, the reasons for our being in Afghanistan are wrong, the reasons for our being in Grenada, and Panama, and as 'advisors' in Colombia and the rest of Latin and South America are wrong. And though I have great respect for the people who sincerely believed in our 'cause' in any of these places, and felt that they had a duty to go, and then performed that duty well, there is nothing honorable to me about the cause in support of which they served and/or died. By saying that, I mean that whatever side you are on, pro-war or anti-war, just being on that side is not enough to warrant my respect and friendship. One quick aside - the comment about the anti-war people who always had to shout fuck/Nixon/war/etc. and generally acted the fool during those demonstrations were probably FBI plants who were trying to incite violence that they could later prosecute. (not that there weren't some just plain general assholes around, as I know there were in the services as well) Just my opinion of course, but - Mothers and fathers, do not give your children to a government to use and dispose of. Children, teach yourselves before you go marching off, with or without your parent's blessings. People, get involved in your government. I often wonder if there would be wars if more women, and elder women at that, were in charge, but women can be warmongering idiots too, I guess, so it will always be up to each individual to take a stand. If you are for peace, you cannot be for war. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 30 May 02 - 11:59 AM As the loathed guest (along with Peace Matriot) in this thread, I just wanted to jump back in to say Pete Boom and Bill Kennedy have expressed their values through their writing here very well. I share those values, and in the context of these Memorial Day threads, I especially agree with Bill's statement: "And though I have great respect for the people who sincerely believed in our 'cause' in any of these places, and felt that they had a duty to go, and then performed that duty well, there is nothing honorable to me about the cause in support of which they served and/or died. By saying that, I mean that whatever side you are on, pro-war or anti-war, just being on that side is not enough to warrant my respect and friendship". I quote it in it's entirety, because I think it bears repeating. I also agree strongly with Pete's suggestion that the vociferous reaction by Mudcat member US veterans and their Mudcat friends is firmly rooted in the American tradition of honoring of *US* military dead exclusively. I think that Bush made an effort to counter that perception among the Europeans (his trip to Europe over US Memorial Day is the first time a US president has ever been outside the US on the day). But the United States has never done much to memorialize people killed in war and armed conflict beyond it's own borders, except it's own soldiers. There are some rare exceptions, most notably the Holocaust memorials (but is that because of the power and influence of the Diasporan Jews and the Israeli lobby? I dunno. Despite that, other communities of US citizens and residents descended from "old country" folk do memorialize their ancestors in US celebrations. But there is only the begrudging and patronizing "multi-culti" support given to those efforts. I'm thinking of one--Cinco de Mayo--which is gaining in popularity here in the US because of the increased Latino population. But there isn't much else. I'm pretty cynical about Bush going to Normandy on US Memorial Day (and really, it still came off to me looking like he was there to honor American war dead, not really to honor all the war dead). I think it was done because of those sorts of mounting criticisms of the way most involved (at any point in their lives) in the US military industrial establishment views our US military as the only war dead worthy of being "honored". I suppose Armistice Day could be viewed as an attempt to honor all the war dead, but really, in the US the military/families of military both present and former, don't seem to like to share the podium with anyone who mentions that it is millions of civilians, not millions of soldiers, which are routinely slaughtered in war. I think of US Memorial Day as the military's holiday. I include the entire military family, which includes many people who have never seen combat or lived abroad. I'd like to believe that US military personnel and their families who have lived and served abroad had a more cosmopolitan and internationalized view of the world, but in my experience they don't. They are often hostile about the natives of the countries they get stationed in, and feel isolated (because they are, of course) and often persecuted by the locals. You see almost identical mentalites on US bases towards the locals. All just my opinion, of course, which hasn't been terribly welcome here. And about forced conscription being a thing of the past in most Western nations (it isn't, and a quick web search makes that clear), it is easy to dispense with conscription in peace time. But when (not if, when) the Western democratic republics decide to go to war again, conscription/the draft will be reinstituted in a heartbeat. I am, however, quite heartened to see the United Nations' movement against the use of child soldiers in armed conflict, forced conscription and sexual slavery that goes with it, making so much headway in recent years. When combined with the United Nations and other human rights organizations' work to end all conscription and forced volunteerism, and international human rights treaties being forced to the top of the international agenda as we have seen in the past decade, including the War Crimes Tribunals treaty the US has refused to sign, I have a tremendous amount of hope for the future. I really do believe we are on the eve of a global transformation, and that a global, just, enforceable peace without the use of military and paramilitary violence, is what our future holds. Too many people have suffered too much, for too long. Anti-war work is some of the most important work a person can do to effective those changes practically, on the ground, today. Over 25 million people, mostly civilians, have been killed in war and armed conflicts worldwide since WWII ended. I believe that the smaller the world becomes, and the harder we fight ALL the institutions of war funded by global capitalism, the sooner we will see that future become our present day reality. The anti-war movements around the world have made tremendous progress in the past 100 years. The people who have been involved in those movements, while highly deserving of our society's highest honors (as someone previously mentioned), receive about the same reception that Peace Matriot and myself have received here. The anti-war and peace activists are mostly reviled by those currently or formerly involved with wars, as the statements we have seen in these threads reflect, IMO. Statements like "you are the type of people who spit on returning war veterans" or "anti-war people shouting fuck Nixon/war" shows how little experience those people have had with the anti-war and peace movements of our time. Those are tired, stale stereotypes, and inaccurate ones at that. We all make choices about the sorts of people we choose to formally and informally "honor and respect". I choose not to honor or respect the choice people make to serve in the military. Rather, I choose to honor those who refuse to serve, who work to end war, armed conflict, and the use of violence to rule instead. Just like the Native Americans who view US Thanksgiving Day as a day of national shame, I view US Memorial Day as a day of national shame. I know that will set off the vets and their friends here, but that's the way it goes. But I can suggest we all come together to honor ALL the war dead, and do all we can, including engaging in antimilitarist activism, to honor the declaration of War Resisters' International: "War is a crime against humanity. I am therefore determined not to support any kind of war, and to strive for the removal of all causes of war". War Resisters' International exists to promote nonviolent action against the causes of war, and to support and connect people around the world who refuse to take part in war or the preparation of war. On this basis, WRI works for a world without war. I honor all peoples' human right to refuse to kill. I honor and participate in 15 May - International Conscientious Objectors' Day activities. I honor and participate in 1 December - Prisoners for Peace Day. I honor and respect people going to jail for engaging in civil disobedience at the School of the Americas, who hammered swords into plowshares at GE, Vietnam draft resisters who went to Canada and/or jail. The Triennial Conference of War Resisters' International will be held this year in Dublin in August. For anyone who might be interested in attending, or learning more about it, here is the website for the "Stories And Strategies Nonviolent Resistance And Social Change" conference: http://www.wri-irg.org/tri/2002/index.htm
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: folk1234 Date: 30 May 02 - 12:09 PM Just a few thoughts re the issue of conscription. Thank you ,Guest Peace Matriot for putting this issue on the table. It is important for posterity that well meaning people on both sides of the issue exchange views. A famous person (was it Churchill?) said, ".. war is diplomacy by other means." When our, and our adversaries', elected and appointed leaders fail in diplomacy, we send our young people to fight and die. When one or both sides has suffered enough, the diplomats find common ground upon which to make peace. Whether the young sacrificial lambs are conscripts or volunteers makes little difference to society or the loved ones left behind. As a young Marine 2ndLt in Vietnam, I had a number of draftees in my platoon. They were a little older and better educated than the 'volunteers', but no less willing to do what they they were asked to do (many times much more) in order to accomplish the mission, survive, and help their comrades survive. They suffered and bled the same red blood as did us 'volunteers/professionals'. A person who has experienced the true horror of combat becomes forever 'anti-war'. Nevertheless, if called upon to serve again, most will, rather than send someone else. Those of us who have different opinions, for example Guest and I, must work within our own realm to both strive for peace, while preparing for war, and most importantly preserving our liberties. To do anything else is pure folly. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 30 May 02 - 12:16 PM "Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh... the Viet Cong are going to win!" Now there is a stupid phrase from a 1969 march I participated in. There were also many shouts of "Fuck Nixon" and I can guarantee you there was at least one non-FBI plant participating in the chanting and the shouts. I mean me. And it was wrong and stupid, but I won't deny it. It was a betrayal of people like Steve and Mick, and I won't deny that either. I will not justify my actions at the time by claiming some high and noble belief. I enjoyed my free unfettered life, sleeping with my girlfriend, playing frisbee in the park, all-night rap sessions about the war and the meaning of life,etc. Sure, I celebrated the sanctity of life...don't most 19 year olds? There was a song popular at the time that said "I got this need, the need to stay alive/ Not ashamed of my creed...I want to survive/ Leave all your loving, your long blonde hair/Don't let them take me cause I'm easily scared". It was only partly tongue in cheek when we all sang along. Should I have been excused from the War because I disagreed with the government's policy? Or because of my concept of the "sanctity of life"? I don't think so. I eventually got out because I showed high blood pressure on my draft physical. My point is this : in the full shadow of conflict, when to serve may very well mean to die, it is easy to come up with high ideals to justify the fact that you just plain don't want to risk it. For the thousands who were like me in the day, it's just plain bullshit. For those who were like Spaw and had a true and abiding belief in the rightness of their action, the refusal to participate is justified. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 30 May 02 - 12:33 PM So Lonesome EJ, did you somehow disagree with the "Fuck Nixon" sentiments? I certainly didn't. In fact, the night Richard Nixon resigned (now there was a day to celebrate!), I was at a concert given by the band War (you know--that great band nobody has ever heard of anymore who did classic pop songs like "All Day Music"), the audience went INSANE!!! It was well over an hour of dancing and screaming and carrying on--the band just put on their pre-concert tape and came out onstage dancing and carrying on with audience--it was one of the best celebrations I ever attended! But you know what Lonesome EJ? IMO, you sound much too cynical to have ever been authentic and sincere about anti-war activism, if your last post is anything to go by. We saw a lot of so-called "peace activists" like that in the 60s and 70s. Mostly looking to party and get laid, as I recall. Folk1234, you totally don't get where I, and other war resisters are coming from. We are opposed to the institutions of war, especially the institutions of war which are perpetually preparing for waging war. You can't, as many people (including Gandhi) have repeatedly pointed out, simultaneously oppose and prepare for/wage war. War resisters oppose the soldiers choice to go to war--or aren't you understanding that difference? We don't support soldiers choices. That is exactly the point of what we do in the most positive sense. We support the people who refuse to become soldiers. We support the people who are trying to education the next generation to become war resisters, and to refuse to serve in and support the military IN ANY WAY. I'm beginning to think some of you really don't get this... :) |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 30 May 02 - 12:49 PM You mean those of us who are actually identifying ourselves, Guest? I thought I said I wasn't a sincere anti-war activist in my previous post? Was it too subtle for you? I'm not sure what you think you might accomplish by accusing me of something I've already freely admitted. Sure, I could carry on a charade of saying I did the right thing back then. Many people do. The fact is, I was young and dedicated to having fun. That became my philosophy. I had not discovered anything that I believed in strongly enough to die for it, and could not even grasp that concept. Fuck Nixon? Sure. I still disagree with many of his policies, and the fact that he was a paranoid was obvious to even his supporters. That doesn't give me some kind of holy dispensation for the basic self-gratification philosophy I held. I'm sure there were some of you who were selflessly dedicated to the anti-draft and anti-war causes at the time. I remember all the dogmatic, humorless statements fed to the hoi palloi at those campus rallies. I suppose even then you suspected we couldn't be relied on when the actual Revolution broke out. You will find, however, that many of us now have the strength of character to stand up, identify ourselves, and speak the truth as we see it. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 30 May 02 - 12:57 PM And some of us, Lonesome EJ, are still dedicated to the same convictions we held then. Why are you so bitter towards us? I fail to see how someone yelling "Fuck Nixon and the war!" was a betrayal of the soldiers fighting the war. Unless you were never sincere about your "objections" to the war, and you've come to believe the government was right, and the anti-war movement was wrong, of course. Then I can understand you do feel you betrayed the men who fought. I would too, if I only was involved in the anti-war movement because the draft and the war interfered with my partying. You are correct, you didn't do much to proud of in the anti-war effort. But some of us did to something authentic and genuine in our involvment in anti-war efforts. Just like some of our life-long friends and family members did. And continue to do today. And raise our children to follow in our footsteps, not yours or the soldiers'.
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: folk1234 Date: 30 May 02 - 01:00 PM I get it, I get, I get it! Please continue your noble efforts. At the same time, let others continue their's. Educate, but don't demand absolute obedience to your doctrine. If your message is believable, others will follow. In your intense fervor, don't eliminate others' freedom of choice, that's fascism. Soldiers are people like EJ, Norton1, Mick, S'paw, you and me. Happy chords,
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST,Bill Kennedy Date: 30 May 02 - 01:08 PM just to interject - this seems like a quibble you two could do privately, but I must say, Guests should be able to post to any thread unafraid of being called names and vilified as cowardds for not posting otherwise. I can see valid reasons for someone not using thier name, say if many of you knew them personally and would have to deal with them in the future. Disagreement with statements made shouldn't devolve into ad guestinem attacks (could't say ad hominem, cause it might be ad feminem!). On a related track, however, to this non-musical, but to me worthwhile thread, I found it rather disheartening to hear Mr. Ambrose describe his new book, now that he is dying of cancer and hasn't long to live, as an attempt to set matters right, especially in respect to his opposition to the war in Vietnam. How can he actually think, now that even McNamara acknowledges his mistake (barely, but an acknowledgement of sorts), that the US was right in that conflict? Or that he and others was wrong in its criticism of the government? I would love to hear his explanation. It makes as little sense to me as the much offered chestnut, that is just a lie, gussied up to be passed of as some self-evident truth, that 'If your young and not a liberal you have no heart, and if your old and not a conservative you have ne head.' Bullshit. If you are a conservative, at any age, you are by definition a hypocrite. You want to be allowed to do anything you want and restrict others from doing whatever they want. You have no heart nor no head, no sense nor no soul. I feel a somg coming on! May have to write another! |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 30 May 02 - 01:12 PM Well, this a bit trickier than "I agree to disagree" now, Folk1234. On the one hand, we have a long human history of warfare and forced conscription of soldiers. As we've discussed elsewhere in the past few days, the idea of "voluntary" soldiering is very modern. Sure, there have always been mercenaries for hire, but there haven't ever been that many of them to tip the balance of power. Now then. We have a global situation where the militaries and the paramilitaries of the world are holding a gun to everyone's head, and saying "agree to disagree", and "respect our choice for deciding to hold a gun to your head". We all know that soldiers are human. But just because they are human doesn't mean we have to allow them to get away with killing other people in our name. There is nothing fascist about not compromising one's ideals and principles. And that is exactly what some here are demanding I do. Compromise my ideals, to accomodate the feelings of military people and their supporters who don't want us troubling their consciences. Sorry, but I won't do that. But that IS NOT fascism. Now, you insisting that war resisters respect the choice of soldiers to kill people--that is pretty bizarre. Let's remember Folk1234, it is a solider's job to kill. Just like the purpose of a weapon is to kill. That's what they do. I don't respect their choice to kill people in war. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 30 May 02 - 01:12 PM I'm not bitter against those who really believed in their cause. And I don't think the war was justified in retrospect. My problem with you stems mainly from the fact that you are afraid of what people might think of you if you identify yourself. I have a feeling that you are someone known on the Forum under a member name, but are hiding it because of fear. There's nothing to be afraid of, is there? Chanting that the Viet Cong were going to win does strike me, looking back, as disloyal and a cheap attempt to provoke bystanders and/or police. It's the kind of thing kids do for attention. I think I've grown beyond that. Am I ashamed of efforts I made to end the war? No, just ashamed of a lot of the tactics I used in that effort. And of the fact that I often viewed those who served in the army as unlucky dupes. We were discussing reasonable views that would justify the status of a Conscientous Objector, and that is why I told my story. I don't think I qualified. I also don't think that a lot of others I knew qualified. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: catspaw49 Date: 30 May 02 - 01:14 PM You can't carry on a private conversation (Personal Messages) with a non-member. This one is so far out that I don't even want to try to start.....maybe later, maybe not. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 30 May 02 - 01:21 PM Not going there on the "guest" thing--and thanks Bill K for your support. Lonesome EJ, I don't know that you and I have much left to say to one another, so I'm happy to let my conversation with you drop out of the thread. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 30 May 02 - 01:46 PM Hey Larry--here's one for you--the Seoul Friends--enjoy the photo, and the COs everywhere! http://www2.gol.com/users/quakers/korea_quakers.htm And here is a somewhat chilling read, about what people of conscience are having to face, from the same Korean Quaker website: http://www2.gol.com/users/quakers/suppress_anticonscription_system.htm
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 30 May 02 - 09:33 PM Hey Guest... thanks for the web page, very interested in that the Korean Quakes look, (at very brief glance) like Hicksites like myself! This is a rather American expression of Quakerism, most African Quakes are more along the English model (though there are liberal Quaker meetings in England). I have to go back and spend a little time reading this, it is possible that US involement in Korea is the sourse of American style Quakerism in Korea. Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Hrothgar Date: 31 May 02 - 04:39 AM PeteBoom, you've been watching "Yes Minister" again! |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: DougR Date: 31 May 02 - 04:50 PM When one becomes wedded to a single point of view, there isn't much room for discussion. Preaching, yes, discussion, no. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: artbrooks Date: 31 May 02 - 05:51 PM "Fuck Nixon"? No thanks...he's not my type, even when he was alive...and I don't swing that way. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Bobert Date: 31 May 02 - 08:40 PM Well, whoever it was that pointed out that there was failed logic in the National Liberation Federation actually winning, well, the NLF did win and the US and its allies lost. But the NLF also lost because there are no real winners in war. Just victors. Someone else said that we strive for peace, while preparing for war. Anything else would be folly. Hmmmmm? There's something inherently wrong with this thinking because, bottom line, if those are your thoughts, you cannot be working toward peaceful settlement of conflict. As the WARRIOR NATION, the US can kick anyone's butt it wants to so, hey, with that a given anytime the US cannot impose the necessary circumstances for folks to not blow each other up, it has failed miserably. I mean, you give my 101 year old senile grandmother the US's might, and she would figure a way to create situations where folks don't go blowing each other up. Duhhhhh! Why is this such a difficult concept for folks to get? The reason that the US continues to blow folks up and allow other folks to blow folks up is because of greed by the ruling class, lazines, shortsightedness, pride, heathens in sheep clothing and an absolute indifference to human life. There are no other ways to look at this. There are no logical rationales. If the US wants peace (or no war... since peace is harder to achieve...) then the US gets no war. Period. But, no, my ol' buddy DougR etal, will say that the ol' Bobert just lives in a dream world. Why? 'Cause the DougR's of the world have been so programed over sych a long period of time that they are no capable of seeing that the world has changed so dramatically that war, as we know it, has to go. It certainly won't happen under the "Last Harrah" Warrior, George WWWWWWWWW Bush but he is a dinosaur and doesn't know it. It will happen because it has to. Period. Now, for all of you who think that blowing folks up is inevitable, and have thousands of hours of tapes running through your heads that prove that blowin folks up is inevitable, it's your turn to run your tapes. Fire away. Ol' Bobert has made himself a big ol' target. Yeah, knock yourselves out... End of rant. Thank God Peace Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Bobert Date: 31 May 02 - 08:53 PM Ahhhh, make that the Natinal Liberation FRONT, thank you... |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Ebbie Date: 31 May 02 - 09:57 PM Bobert, an analogy to the 'striving for peace while preparing for war: When I finally knew I was going to quit smoking, for the first time I didn't make sure I had a closed pack on hand "just in case". All those times before, when I had tried to quit , obviously I knew, deep down, that I wasn't going to make it. Talk about lack of motivation! My point is that if we know that war is unacceptable, totally out of the question, we will not go to war. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 31 May 02 - 10:13 PM I like that analogy Ebbie. Quitting smoking was, for me, incredibly hard, and even the "last time" I smoked, I didn't really believe I was going to quit. I got up one day, and didn't smoke anymore. In fact, as I type this, I'm laughing because I can't even remember my last smoke--not a thing about it! I can't even remember how many years I've been smoke free! Around 10 years maybe? People have asked me how I did it. What I did was quit doing the things I associated with smoking. I quit coffee, recreational drugs, and alcohol. I knew if I did any of those things, my will power would be shot, and I'd smoke. I didn't tell myself I could never have those things again. I just told myself I couldn't do them and stay off cigarettes. I still don't drink coffee, and I haven't done recreational drugs since. I probably went 2 or 3 years before I drank. And I didn't miss any of it Of course, food tasted so damn good I ate enough to gain 50 lbs! But eventually I lost that too. Anyway, the analogy is a good one for any sort of behavior that has to change. Justifying not changing the behavior results in one thing, and one thing only--continuing the behavior. Maybe we should start with not recruiting/enlisting/drafting any more folks into military service. If we just did that--declared a moratorium on new blood coming in, we could also quit buying and building new weapons. Eventually you'll run out of soldiers and weapons. And then what will we do? Pax to you too Bobert. :) |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Bobert Date: 31 May 02 - 10:46 PM Thanks for the assist, Ebbie and GUEST. Going on 16 years without smokin' myself and I did it the same way. It's not an acceptable behavior for my future. Like thinking of alternatives to war. Nah, we've done that and that didn't do a thing but perpetuate the stupidity. It's going to take just a sliver of credibility. Once that occurs then a lot of folks around the world are going to all figure it out like a light bulb coming on and DARE to change human behavior forever. Like not smoking. WE DON'T DO THAT ANY MORE, thank you. If we get enought folks thinking that we don't do that any more, then guess what, mankinds future is changed forever. IT IS POSSIBLE. AND INEVITABLE. Sure would be nice to happen under our watch.... Peace Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: DougR Date: 31 May 02 - 11:43 PM Bobert! I can't belive it! We agree on something! I do agree you live in a dream world! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: CarolC Date: 31 May 02 - 11:51 PM We are the Music-Makers
We are the music-makers,
With wonderful deathless ditties
We, in the ages lying
-- Arthur O'Shaughnessy
Only those who can see the invisible can do the impossible... -- Machaelle Wright |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: DougR Date: 01 Jun 02 - 01:15 AM Mebbe so, Carol C, but when did Arthur O'Shaughnessy write that? Have things changed in that direction since he did? The world needs dreamers, though, and I'm glad both you and Bobert are around to do it. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: CarolC Date: 01 Jun 02 - 01:26 AM I don't know when it was written, but he lived from 1844–1881.
Have things changed in that direction since he did?
I'd say yes, many times over.
The world needs dreamers, though, and I'm glad both you and Bobert are around to do it. :>)
Thanks. Without the dreamers, nothing would ever happen. Everything that humans do starts out as an idea in someone's head. It's a beautiful poem, isn't it?
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 06:44 AM Hi DougR: We anti war folkies, well, as to living in a dream world, once India and Pakistan begin hurling nukes at each other, dream worlds may be the only world we have... Cheers larry |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: leprechaun Date: 01 Jun 02 - 07:51 AM I'm striving for health while preparing for disease. Is that hypocritical of me? Should I just assume that as long as I don't want a disease I won't get one? Perhaps we should get rid of all the doctors, pharmacists, medicines and herbal remedies, and then nobody will ever get sick. After all, isn't medicine just a war on germs? Perhaps we should learn to live with germs, reason with them, be their friends. Sure. Yeah. That's the ticket. Be nice to the germs and then they won't hurt us. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: GUEST Date: 01 Jun 02 - 09:31 AM I'm striving for good health too, but I'm not preparing to get sick as I do it. That analogy doesn't work for me. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 10:57 AM Germs ain't people... but if you saw the PBS program about viruses, well, you raise an interesting point. When we treat with antibotics we create untreatable viruses, but there is a new experiment to encourage less viralent versions of viruses (what illiteration!!!) in that viruses that need their host, water borne viruses tend to be less deadly than insect born viruses (to paraphrase to the point of lossing the sence of the study completely!) But, the fact is we are in an arms race with germs and loosing... begining to get the point???? We have me the enamy and they is us... Larry who is touched by the outpouring of concern over my biopsy!) |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Ebbie Date: 01 Jun 02 - 11:08 AM Actually, InObu, I was wondering about your biopsy. I don't suppose it's common to have a malignancy on one's finger but a biopsy implies the possibility... Do you have the test results yet? |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 11:15 AM Thanks Ebbie, just a wee moment of feeling a tad pissy... Will know in a few days... the Doc was pretty perplexed as well, and being late in the day, didn't do a very good job of closing the wound, so now three days later it is still bleeding, hence my being a tad out of sorts... sorry for lapse, I will let ya know, likely it is nothing... Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: DougR Date: 01 Jun 02 - 12:06 PM Hmm. Larry: "We Anti-War folkies." I would consider everyone who has posted to this thread anti-war. Just because some of us believe that the only solution to some major disputes is going to war, does not brand us as being pro-war. Comprendo? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 01 Jun 02 - 12:10 PM I truly do wish the key to ending war was just to think peace, to change our attitudes. I think of Neville Chamberlain, a kind and intelligent man, landing in his plane in England with Hitler's Treaty in his hand and declaring "we shall have Peace in our time". Now if Neville and Adolph had been of the same mind, it would have been quite possible, but instead, what you had was a Prime Minister who thought every difference could be settled through peaceful negotiation, and another who thought he would see what he could gain through peaceful negotiation before launching all-out war. The German people were not simply a bunch of fanatics led into war by a raving maniac. They were a country who had been defeated in a previous war, who had territory removed from them, whose economy had suffered complete collapse, and who were crippled by War Reparation Payments. They had legitimate (to them) complaints. Coupled with Hitler's ambition for a single German-dominated European Empire, the stage was set for what followed. PEACE was not even a desirable option for them! Peace is like love...before you can have it, you must have two people who want it. Otherwise somebody gets hurt. This seems so simple to me, I cannot comprehend the failure to appreciate it. Bobert said As the WARRIOR NATION, the US can kick anyone's butt it wants to so, hey, with that a given anytime the US cannot impose the necessary circumstances for folks to not blow each other up, it has failed miserably. I mean, you give my 101 year old senile grandmother the US's might, and she would figure a way to create situations where folks don't go blowing each other up. Duhhhhh! Why is this such a difficult concept for folks to get? Does he mean that the US should impose terms on the rest of the World so that Peace is mandatory? I guess, in terms of my previous statement, what he's saying is that if the two parties are not of one mind regarding Peace, then the party with the most nukes gets to declare peace on his terms. How in hell is that a new approach?
|
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Ebbie Date: 01 Jun 02 - 12:15 PM They had legitimate (to them) complaints. LEJ, that's part of the key, I think. Attention to and redress of injuries is essential. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 01 Jun 02 - 12:30 PM Ebbie, they wanted Prussia back, the Sudetenland, the German-speaking parts of Poland, and Austria. There were people living there who didn't want to become part of Greater Germany! In fact, Chamberlain gave them most of those things in an attempt to pacify Hitler. Hitler just continued to up the ante. Britain stood by and watched the blitzkreig roll over its own ally, Poland, in hopes that Germany would be satisfied. In a relationship where one nation seeks peace and the other seeks domination, the continuing effort by the peaceful nation becomes appeasement. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: DougR Date: 01 Jun 02 - 12:59 PM Well said, LEJ. I just returned from my two mile walk in 90 degree weather and had decided to bring Mr. Chamberlain into this conversation, but you did it so eloquently, there is no need to repeat it. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 01:09 PM Fact is, Chamberlan was not the power behind fascist move forward, they could not have gone anywhere without the help of US corporations and mogals, who, Like Rockafeller and Morgan, dealt with them throughout the war. Morganthau wanted badly to charge them with treating with the enamy, (I actually read his hand written notes in the National Archive) after the war. Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 01 Jun 02 - 01:55 PM Larry, there is no doubt that the Arms Industry rejoiced at Hitler's military buildup just as they are now licking their chops over the India/Pakistan confrontation. The lust for obscene profit generated by killing is only one of the factors that contribute to war, though. Certainly the Pacific theatre in World War 2 was generated by Japan's perception that the West was dominating Asian Markets and exploiting Asian resources. Their declared goal of liberating Asia for the Asians was belied by such actions as the Slaughter of Shanghai, and the ensuing treatment of conquered peoples as slave laborers and worse. Their goal was Japanese domination of the Asian markets and resources, just as Hitler's goal was German domination. My question remains....how do you achieve Peace in the face of such motivating factors on the side of powerful aggressive states? How do you propose achieving Peace between India and Pakistan, when the hostility is motivated by a thousand years of religion-based hatred? If we dissolve the nation-states and corporations, will mankind, returned to a tribal level, be less likely to make war? Studies of primitive cultures certainly don't indicate that. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 02:28 PM Well... it is not an easy process, in order to bring about peace, once also has to bring about a wee bit of fairness. We can't keep accepting extreem poverty as the cost of our wealth. Further, there is not a single monolithic primitive culture, there are many different cultures warlike and peaceful in the past and present, I tend to think of large industrial states which don't have the intelectual advancement to figure out a better way of dealing with conflict than war as being primitive, but that is a term I use with some caution. Cheers, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 01 Jun 02 - 03:22 PM The problem lies in this : In a world at peace, there must be either a balance of power that holds antagonistic forces in mutual respect and paasivity, or a single leadership. If the single leadership option is chosen, that leadership must be acceptable to the Great Powers, and there's the rub : The League of Nations and the Untied Nations were created as a form of world governing body, but are only effective when the Great Powers agree on laws and actions. |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 03:30 PM Lonesome!!! Why only two option? The world is not only either or! There is at least one other option, likely loads of options, the oppotion of cooperation and mutual respect! Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: DougR Date: 01 Jun 02 - 03:42 PM Larry, Larry, Larry ...:>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Lonesome EJ Date: 01 Jun 02 - 04:17 PM How's it going to work, Larry? I need a process. Dreams are great, but how to turn them into reality? |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: Ebbie Date: 01 Jun 02 - 04:47 PM I think we're talking about a beginning, a mindset. In a world that has always (?) thought in terms of war as a means of domination, peaceful change is not an easy concept. My precepts: 1. Most people are normal people who mainly want the chance to birth their babies, pursue their own version of happiness and see the future as being a limitless expanse of opportunity and challenge. 2. Most people do not want to suffer loss nor deliver loss to others. 3. Most people do not want to hate anyone to the point of demonization of others; given a chance they see other people pretty much the same as themselves. 4. The occasional madman or megalomaniac will be given short shrift in a world that sees no viable future in attacking others. **In reading the history of Nazism in the German culture, it becomes quite clear that the administration made a number of tentative moves from time to time to ascertain the mood of the German people and how much they would stand for and at what speed. If the German people ( read that as us in a similar situation) had spoken at those points of intervention, history would have developed differently. 5. Education and exposure to other cultures are important, overwhelmingly important. In modern times not many leaders who have traveled extensively have waged war. 6. A world that recognizes the common humanity of man and the right of every person to access to enough food, shelter and a safe environment will be a very different world from this one where we deem it sad but acceptable to view millions of children wasting away of hunger and disease in front of our easy chairs. There are many, many other 'givens' one could list. I just don't see that, in a world of tremendous and ever-growing danger, we must continue to think in the same old, same old, kneejerk fashion we've been doing for millenia. Shouldn't time and experience count for something? |
|
Subject: RE: Anti-Conscription Movement From: InOBU Date: 01 Jun 02 - 05:05 PM Ebbie did such a good job, I can go out and do my concert at Artquake now, confident that we are on the road to peace. So, DougR, Lonsome, now that your questions are answered, do the right thing. Be good for now, and listen for the sound of distant appaluse. I am going on tonight, without band, without pipes, singing just me, as me old dad used to do, as me old hand is not working yet. Gud nite all... Cheers Larry |
| Share Thread: |