Yesterday the Times had a great piece on a West Point colonel, Gian Gentile, who has opposed the new militant doctrine of Counter Insurgency. Reporter Elisabeth Bumiller says there's an active debate about US policy at the military academy:
Broadly, the question is what the United States gained after a decade in two wars.
“Not much,” Col. Gian P. Gentile, the director of West Point’s military history program and the commander of a combat battalion in Baghdad in 2006, said flatly in an interview last week. “Certainly not worth the effort. In my view.”
Colonel Gentile also has a great post up at the Atlantic slamming General Stanley McChrystal's decision to give a seminar at Yale but keep it off the record. Guess there's more debate at West Point than at Yale.
Gentile's outspokenness reminds me: These days inside the US establishment, the military is the leading antiwar voice. Institutional liberalism is not taking a strong role in opposing American militarism. The strongest statements about the Palestinian issue have been from generals.
Don't get me wrong, there is clearly a strong grassroots antiwar left in the country-- the occupy movement, Norman Solomon's congressional campaign in California, Code Pink's brave leaders, just to name a few. But inside American mainstream institutions, the strongest criticism of America's overseas adventures lately has come from a West Point colonel. Not to mention that rightwing libertarian running for president as a Republican, Ron Paul. The Brookings Institution isn't antiwar. The Council on Foreign Relations is full of rightwing militants. And though there are antiwar congresspeople-- Lynne Woolsey, Maxine Waters, Walter Jones, and Dennis Kucinich-- they are outliers. Conservative forces have played an important antiwar role. Antiwar.com is a libertarian site, the American Conservative has lionized the great Bradley Manning.
Why are liberal institutions AWOL? The main reason is the successful divorce of elites from military service with the end of the draft. So liberal establishment figures no longer had to worry about their children serving in stupid wars they supported. The New Yorker played a leading role opposing the Vietnam War, but supported the Iraq war. And yes, I think the Israel lobby also plays a role; traditional doves turned into hawks when it came to the Middle East. And these hawks have had a prominent role in establishment institutions. Joe Lieberman, Howard Berman, and Chuck Schumer all began their careers as anti-Vietnam-war liberals. No longer. Haim Saban funds Brookings, and he's an ardent Zionist. The Center for American Progress is closely aligned with the Democratic Party and it has done a famously lousy job of resisting the push for war with Iran. During Vietnam, Senator Gene McCarthy ran against the war inside the Democratic Party. So did George McGovern. Those prominent Dems can't be found this time round.
P.S. Helena Cobban is on the Gentile interview here.
RE: “The Brookings Institution isn’t antiwar…Why are liberal institutions AWOL? …Haim Saban funds Brookings, and he’s an ardent Zionist.” ~ Weiss
SEE: “Haim Saban”, by Matthew Yglesias, The Atlantic, June 10, 2007
SOURCE – link to theatlantic.com
* FROM WIKIPEDIA [Kenneth Pollack]:
SOURCE – link to en.wikipedia.org
P.S. ALSO SEE: Thinktank [Foundation for Defense of Democracies] that promoted war w/ Iraq (& now Iran) was funded by Steinhardt, Saban, Bronfman, Feith and Marcus (of Home Depot) – link to mondoweiss.net
That name!
How could West Point employ someone with such an anti-semitic moniker???
:D
Patrick J Buchanon has a good piece over at Antiwar.com, mentioned Mondoweiss and quotes Phil Weiss ” I am still reeling” on the debate with Jeremy Ben Ami. [How Bill Kristol purged the Arabists Antiwar.com 29-04 2012]
Yeah, I saw that, that was awesome! Tons and tons of people read Buchanan’s column, he’s got the largest syndicated column in the country I believe. I was absolutely thrilled to see him mention Phil Weiss by name.
I hope that drives readers to this site. Likewise I hope this site continues its positive trend in staying clear from annoying social liberalism (and censoring discussions about it), so that those people won’t be turned off.
Pat Buchanan has a whole bunch of really astute articles available on Antiwar.com. Of course he and Ron Paul are dismissed as idiots by both the left, central, and right.
Who’s the idiot? Mitt, who will bomb Iran tomorrow if given the chance, and now calls for our military intervention in Syria? Or Obama, who has cut off the strategy of containment on Iran, and told us a month or so ago he will squeeze the Iranian people until they squeak, and if that don’t make them OK no more enrichment, bomb them? Notice here, neither he nor his interviewer even brought out the factor that Israel constantly threatens Israel with an attack, and that Israel has 400 nuclear bombs: link to theatlantic.com
How can Obama talk about the threat of nuclear proliferation in the ME without even bringing up the fact Israel has the bomb, and is not a member of NNPT? Why should we take him seriously? My only question is will Bibi bomb Iran before November if it looks to him that Obama will get a second term? If Bibi does, Obama basically admits we too then will be at war with Iran. It’s not even a real issue.
“Likewise I hope this site continues its positive trend in staying clear from annoying social liberalism “
So we can spend more time on right-wing, conservative causes like supporting the Palestinians?
What the hell is your game, gazacalling? Whether you like it or not, the Palestinian cause is a social liberal cause.
Please, gazacalling, please go find me the enormous cohort which espouses neo-conservatism, second-class staus for women, a move away from liberal principles to right-wing solution, and the rights of the Palestinians. Yes sir, I can sure see that, a guy with “Stop Killing Babies” on one side of his sign and “Free Palestine from the Zionists, Stop the Occupation” on the other.
I strongly suggest that anybody who wishes to engage “gazacalling” should take a look at his comment archive, especially the posts on women’s rights, or rather, how to take them away.
And on a personal note, I find panty-sniffers very creepy.
What the hell is your game, gazacalling?
oh god open the floodgates why don’t you mooser, what are you thinking?
I’m sorry, Annie. Should’ve just ignored him. But as I said, I can’t stand panty-sniffers.
“(and censoring discussions about it)”
Ah! The link makes it all clear! Click it and learn!
I wouldnt say there is a “strong” left of any kind, but thats just me.
As for liberal institutions and their stances regarding war and such – I think its as much about class and wealth as it is about the draft. Im sure this will get me bashed, but among “the left” there is an overwhelming level of condescension and general disdain for the military and the people who would join it. In our society, where going to college and so on are generally accepted by all as “the thing to do” – by joining the military, in some peoples eyes, you’ve given up, or had to join because you lacked what it takes to succeed in civilian society; this has a way of “otherizing” the military, especially among “the left” – who all apparently, went to Harvard and shit.
*If I have to remind Citizen again that I am a former Marine, Im gonna flip out*
Liberal institutions are busy doing other things, like discussing queer theory in pets, and trying to save the kids at Harvard a couple bucks on their student loan interest- you didnt get the memo, Phil? And besides Phil, West Point is full of strapping young people, people who are smart and broad-shouldered AND competitive, both physically AND mentally, and identify only with a catch all like ‘cadet’ – this is a direct threat to the current “left.” So, better to distance yourself from people like this. I guess what Im saying is, I think “the left” hates folks like those at west point slightly more than they hate war.
“Liberal institutions are busy doing other things, like discussing queer theory in pets”…Dan
rotflmao…..that’s a good description. The left makes me as sick as the right does.
“The left makes me as sick as the right does.”
Now, if only you could define “the left” and show where it has the slightest impact on your life, you might almost have a point.
I flip out whenever I hear the sentence, “Thank you for your service.” I think I am suppose to wag my tail.
Dan’s comment reflects my own experience too. I went to college after getting out of the Army, that’s where I first learned what the (relatively) elite thinks of the US military, and most especially of the common grunt.
“Dan’s comment reflects my own experience too. I went to college after getting out of the Army, that’s where I first learned what the (relatively) elite thinks of the US military, and most especially of the common grunt.”
Exactly what do you think that college people are required to think of the people who choose to join the military? Simply because the military and the jingos like to portray the military as “fighting for freedom” and that, doesn’t make it true, nor does it mean that the rest of us have to agree. I, for one, see the fawning over military people to be extremely misguided, and prevents honest and forthright discussion about what the military actually does and whether we, as a country, want a millitary that does those things or is even capable of doing those things.
And it’s no excuse, in my mind, to claim that you may hate the war, but you should love the warrior, or nonsense like that. Frankly, everyone who joined had the option not to do so. They chose to take actions that I find to be offensive and in many cases criminal (and that is not even addressing things like all the torture, murders, etc., that go on in these wars.) Under what reasoning would it be improper for me to hold those people in contempt or to to decide that the reasoning process by which they chose to become weapons of illegal policies was insanity?
Woody, when I was in the military there was a military draft. Their college student age peers use to spit on our soldiers when they came home. College deferments went to kids who’s parents could afford college; there was no readily available student loans. Another out was the National Guard back in those days, which was at that time also a protected enclave for the youth of the wealthy and influential.
So now we have an all-volunteer Military. The demographics of most enlisted grunts indicates they are from rural and small town areas, most especially from the South and secondarily, the Midwest; job opportunities left those areas long ago. (Even read the military death notices in the paper?) The other main motivation for joining up is old-fashion patriotism, a sense that it is honorable to serve one’s country when it is at war. I agree with you if these kids knew who benefits from war, just how political and self-serving our leaders are, the US & World would be much better off.
My own opinion is that our wars are fought mostly by lower working class kids; that they are dupes and should avoid joining. The old term for these kids is “cannonfodder.” It is accurate. (During the Civil War, on the Union side, you could avoid conscription by paying somebody else to take your place.)
A military draft with no exceptions (including combat roles) would end all these wars our Congress authorizes, overnight.
And just like that, Woody proves my point. Cheers.
Citizen,
As for the spitting claims, I can neither condone nor condemn that. I think for those who were drafted, they were not responsible for being in uniform, but there is no doubt that, once there, the commission of crimes against the Vietnamese people were enormous and engaged in often as a matter of course. So given that reality (and that is the reality, regardless of retroactive attempts to whitewash the crimes committed by US soldiers in S.E. Asia as being the rare bad apple), those who reacted by attacking soldiers were not out of line. Some of those people had committed unspeakable crimes and many never suffered even a moment’s problem for it. Calley served a few years of house arrest for murdering upwards of 500 people in cold blood. Of the dozens of others who were guilty? Nothing. Not even that slap on the wrist.
So, no, I will not condemn those who condemned the soldiers because many of those soldiers deserved condemnation. If there were soldiers who were spat upon who did nothing wrong, then that is unfortunate. But in the grand scheme of things, that pales in comparison to the injustice that resulted from US soldiers in the war, aided and abetted by an attitude which puts the glorification of the soldier above the morality which we all owe to one another. And aided and abetted by a culture which mandated unthinking obedience to so-called superiors and a clannishness among soldiers which mandated protection of them from non-soldiers, even in cases of criminal activity.
As for the “kids” of today, they are not kids, but adults. The notion to want to defend your country from attack is indeed a noble one, so long as you are, in fact, attacked, and not 1) attacking other people who do not deserve it or 2) merely suffering from blowback which your country, itself, caused.
Frankly, none of those motives apply to the US military today. These people who enlist, whetehr they want to accept it or not, are engaged in a con-game in which they are used by economic and government powers, after having been fed lies about “protecting freedom.” I do feel bad that they were taken in and I feel bad that the very forces which limited their economic opportunities domestically are the same ones which are behind the con-game in which they find themselves while in uniform. I don’t resolve them of all responsiblity, though, because in this day and age, one needs only spend a few focused hours on the internet to understand a little of what’s really going on.
Finally, while I understand your point about the draft, I find no reason why anyone should be forced to fight and die in a military against their will. This is nothing less than slavery.
Woody,
Re: “Of the dozens of others who were guilty? Nothing. Not even that slap on the wrist.”
True, now put your own observation in perspective. Just looking at those Americans who died in the Vietnam War: 58,000? The reality is most American kids (average age 19) who fought in that war never did anything like Lt Calley’s command did. Nobody I know who served when I did would have followed Calley’s command. Did you forget about all the fraggings of officers? I do agree with you that “in this day and age, one needs only spend a few focused hours on the internet to understand a little of what’s really going on.” No young American in 2012 should join the US Military.
If that happened, what do you think would happen as a practical and politically astute matter? I can’t wait for your response.
Also, I gather you were not in the US combat forces during the Vietnam War. Have you ever talked to any common grunt that was?
You seem so certain that Calley’s POV was endemic, so I was wondering.
What’s to put in perspective? They killed 80-year olds and babies. The fact that they were 19 is irrelevant. A 19 year old is not a “kid;” a 19 year old is an adult and fully responsible for his actions, especially when those acts consist of murdering babies and children in cold blood.
I also do not understand what the number of American KIAs had to do with anything. No one-year-old Vietnamese child was responsible for those deaths.
Further, this was not an isolated incident by Calley, all by himself. FOIA requests have uncovered reports that incidents such as this occurred on a regular basis. You say that no one you knew would have followed Calley’s orders, and I hope you are right that none did, but many, many, soldiers, exactly like those you knew, did exactly that, at My Lai and at all the other places. Whether Calley’s POV was endemic or not, we’ll never know. By virtue of the fact that these incidents were almost always covered up, as My Lai was for a long time, we’ll never know how many GIs participated in the murders. I doubt if it was most, but we really have no way of knowing for sure. Was it .05% of the soldiers? 2%? 10%? 40%? Who knows? We want to believe it was as few as possible, and maybe it was. But be warned: we Americans really like to lie to ourselves. A lot.
So, like I said, I think that those who got through the war without committed crimes were dealt a great injustice by the reaction, but I cannot condemn those who reacted that way. If anyone is to blame it is not the one who spit, but the one who committed the crime which caused the one to spit, to spit.
“If that happened, what do you think would happen as a practical and politically astute matter? I can’t wait for your response.”
If that happened, I have no doubt that there would be a draft. The machine requires meat and it will get it no matter what.
im glad that woody commented on this thread – i started out by saying that “the left” hates military folks more than they hate war, and boy-o-boy did he confirm it.
and of course, “military folks” are generally people who joined to better their lives, learn a trade and so on – so to me, those who have such disdain for people in the military, really just hate those who would be in a position to join it.
and that is why there is no anti-war left – the left hates the smell of the working class and the poor more than they hate the wars those same working class and poor go and fight.
The perspective comes, if you have a rational mind, from the fact that if 58,000 Americans died, many more actually participated in the Vietnam War, many more than the few dozen you allude to as committing atrocities like Calley’s command did. Nevertheless, The Winter Soldier Investigation revealed Calley’s incident may have been commonplace. Personally, I bet it was more so, than not–because most US casualties came from booby traps and the US soldiers could literally not tell who was the enemy. Try real hard, think back to when you were 19, and how much judgment you had, and add on: when your own life was in constant danger. Now add on the US policy of “a war of attrition.” No excuses, Woody, but you don’t strike me as as a guy who has the slightest notion or feeling for being a common grunt finding themselves in the US combat arms at age 19. Still, I have followed you on this blog, and nearly always agree with your assessment of whatever topic. Can you source what you say about how commonplace Mai Lai type atrocities were from those Freedom Of Information files you say so support your view as to commonplace of such atrocities?
Just asking. I am not going to defend the average US soldier in Vietnam from your hatred. I experienced such hatred–before the Mai Lai incident came to public awareness, in 1969. And I certainly don’t defend the US war in Vietnam, which was based on the Domino Theory of USSR encroachment. I just don’t think you yourself have ever been tested as young adults, average age 19, were. And those who spit on them, and me, in front of my eyes I know for a fact did not have the slightest clue–they were privileged kids. BTW, in additional to being spit on by college students as an X-Army kid, back in the day, I was beaten by Chicago cops for being a hippy-peacenik in Grant Park. At the time I attended Roosevelt University. At the time, I was reading Doiesoyevski’s The Devils (The Possessed). It was cold. I wore my old army field jacket. It was the only one I had.
Citizen: Okay, I get where you’re going with the number of KIAs. I wasn’t sure if it was a number thing or if you were arguing that the deaths themselves were relevant.
First, let me point out that the few dozen I was refering to were the few dozen who were even charged (both with the killing and the cover up). But the larger point is that we simply don’t know how many there were, because the cover ups and simply lack of investigation made that impossible.
Second, I don’t specifically recall where I read about the FOIA request material, whether it was an article on Winter Soldier or a piece about My Lai itself. I just don’t specifically recall. I will try to find it.
Third, I do remember being 19, but what I can’t do is get from there to a point where I would shot a one-year old baby because of where I found myself. I just can’t do that. That’s the problem I keep running into.
Fourth, I want to say that I do not have hatred for the average US soldier in Vietnam. I hate attrocities that were done by some of them. As I said, to those who were spat upon but were innocent of the attrocities, that is unfortunate and should not have happened. But the anger that caused that reaction was a proper anger. And certainly some of those who were spat upon deserved it.
Fifth, you keep repeating the notion of people being “priveleged” or “elite” and implying that such people should not have held and should not hold certain opinions. That does not make any sense. If a person is informed and makes a decision, what does it matter if he or she is “priveleged” or “elite”? Or do you believe that soldiers are free from criticism simply by virtue of being soldiers?
Finally, there is no excuse for the action of the police and I would condemn that whole heartedly.
“im glad that woody commented on this thread – i started out by saying that ‘the left’ hates military folks more than they hate war, and boy-o-boy did he confirm it.”
Nonsense, Dan. I hate what was done by military people in My Lai and elsewhere. Don’t you?
“and of course, ‘military folks” are generally people who joined to better their lives, learn a trade and so on”
Yes, but they make a deal with the devil when they do so, because they make themselves instruments of forces which causes such hardship in the world.
“so to me, those who have such disdain for people in the military, really just hate those who would be in a position to join it.”
No, I don’t hate them. For the most part I have no feelings about them, good or ill. I pity the fact that they make themselves into the tools of those who would misuse US power in the world but I don’t hate them. I would rather they read Smedley Butler and then find another way to better their lives and get their training.
“and that is why there is no anti-war left – the left hates the smell of the working class and the poor more than they hate the wars those same working class and poor go and fight.”
That’s just silly (at least regards to me.) My concern is that those who would misuse the military often do so to prop up a corrupt economic system that limits the opportunites for the working class and the poor. Sheesh, Dan, give it some perspective.
Let me correct this to make my point clearer:
First, let me point out that the few dozen I was refering to were the few dozen who were even charged (both with the killing and the cover up) for My Lai. But the larger point is that we simply don’t know how many there were who committed attrocites like in My Lai, during the entirety of the conflict, because the cover ups and simple lack of investigation made that impossible.
“Their college student age peers use to spit on our soldiers when they came home.”
Oh really? Got a cite for that? Even one? The only spitting incident I ever heard of was one where VFA louts spit on returning soldiers for ‘losing the war’.
But I’m prepared to apologise anytime you find a cite for the “Their college student age peers use to spit on our soldiers when they came home.”
Sorry Citizen, it didn’t happen. Except of course, for the VFA guys, and I’m not sure you can call them “the left”
Well around here, near PGNS, Keyport, Bangor and good old Ft Lewis (home of the Stryker Force, and jumping off point for Iraq) we all consider our soldiers and sailors real heroes. After all we all make our living off them.
Okay, so tell me why we were over there killing the Vietnamese at all? And most soldiers didn’t need to do what Calley did. Why go through all that noise and expose yourself when you can just call in an airstrike?
“Third, I do remember being 19″
So do I, and I wasn’t going to take orders from any gaddam insane southern officer. Nor was I going to shoot at people who ate better food than me, and had prettier women.
And I didn’t want to die a virgin, but it looks like I’ll just have to face up to that.
Got a cite for that?
no,thereis not one photo or journalistic citing from the time. it was a cooked up propaganda thing. it’s been researched.
“Exactly what do you think that college people are required to think of the people who choose to join the military?”
Well, it’s hard to blame them for being contemptuous of a guy who slogged through years of military service, when he could have gone to college, been recruited by the CIA, and stayed on to do well funded research for the Pentagon.
WOODY TANAKA- “But the larger point is that we simply don’t know how many there were who committed attrocites like in My Lai, during the entirety of the conflict, because the cover ups and simple lack of investigation made that impossible.”
Actually, the distinctive feature of My Lai was that it was reported at all. Shit like this happened all of the time and was part of the battle plan. There is a reason they refer to an area as a “free fire zone.” Worse yet were the B-52 raids in which the most heavily populated area of Viet Nam was carpet bombed resulting in massive death and destruction. Viet Nam, like Korea before it, was one massive imperial killing field. Some folks just can’t seem to understand that Uncle Sam is a serial mass-murderer. All of the “civilized” Western empires were/are. White man’s burden and all.
.” I just don’t think you yourself have ever been tested as young adults, average age 19, were.”
What the hell is this? I was tested, and passed with flying colors! I made arrangements to go to Canada, if necessary, and swore to myself that if I did end up in the military I would desert. And to this day, no one has ever been able to break me of my cowardice in the face of battle, it’s the one attribute (and family tradition, I might add) I have been unswervingly loyal to!
I wasn’t going to let anybody but me dispose of my life, or make me kill if I could help it. I passed the test.
But don’t beat yourself up over it, Citizen (which it’s pretty much obvious you are, you protest way, way too much) we all make mistakes when we are too young to know any better. And given our media diet, how on earth could any young man have an objective view of military service? And the desire for approval is almost overwhelming in the young male, and we are very easily manipulated by it. You aren’t the only one.
And if you’re into Russian writers try Dostoevsky. He wrote a book about me, you know. I’m sure you know the title.
“BTW, in additional to being spit on by college students as an X-Army kid, back in the day, I was beaten by Chicago cops for being a hippy-peacenik”
Why Annie, are you saying Citizen is prevaricating or embroidering? On the other hand, doesn’t it rain quite a bit, with a sharp wind, in Chicago?
“I went to college after getting out of the Army, that’s where I first learned what the (relatively) elite thinks of the US military, and most especially of the common grunt.”
Woody, you criticise this statement as if Citizen hadn’t done his Masters thesis on the subject, and just formed a subjective opinion! You have to learn to respect peer-reviewed sociological research using scientific sampling and data collection! You can’t just blow it off.
“the left hates the smell of the working class”
That is so awful of them. If anybody ever tells me exactly who “the left” is, I will go right over and set them straight or punch them in the nose!
But apparently this “the left” is an even more slippery and fungible person than “the Jews”.
Oh, I do know one identifiable and real component of “the left”. You know, all those “extremeist lefty’s” who are so critical of Israel and enamored of Palestinian rights! But thank the Good Lord above, nobody here would associate or lend support to leftist ideas like that. It would be, well, leftist.
the left hates the smell of the working class and the poor more than they hate the wars those same working class and poor go and fight.
whoa, that’s a pretty intense statement. a lot of the working classisleft. at least where i live.
Why Annie, are you saying Citizen is prevaricating or embroidering?
i just reviewed what he wrote. i was originally reading off your comment.
citizen, did people really spit at you?
Mooser
Re-read Citizen’s comment. He’s giving you his *personal* experience, and the evidence of his own eyes! We don’t yet have the technology to link to another person’s memories. Maybe next century. Then he’ll be able to put a memory stick in his ear, download a few moments from 40+ yrs ago and create a link for you!
RE: “I made arrangements to go to Canada, if necessary, and swore to myself that if I did end up in the military I would desert.”
Well, so we know you were not The Underground Man, more a Hero of those times lacking all caprice, ready to dodge the draft, no matter what cost to anyone else. Why almost straight out of Lermentov! Even more, a regular family tradition, you add. I will take your word for all that.
Dostoevsky himself went to prison for his ideas, 4 years, Then he served in the army, again 4 years–both in Siberia.
I was told I was the first person in the history of Fort Knox basic training to decline OCS. I was diverted therefore from engineering school at Ft Belvoir to what amounted at the time to the army penal colony: Ft Leonard Wood, the combat engineers. Later, I was transferred from one pioneer company to another, as well as being demoted and otherwise punished for punching a second lieutenant in the face. And you, Mooser, don’t know me for I was spit on in Chicago by students of Roosevelt University, and also beat with a baton by the Chicago Police in Grant Park–at the time I had to trek though that Park to get to that university, where I was studying Doestovesky’s works, taught by a very old Jew from Kiev
Keith, that’s exactly right. That was the point I was trying to get at. We love to lie to ourselves about how pervasive this stuff is because we really want to think we’re wearing the white hats.
Woody – my comments were never to say that people who served should be lionized, far from it. I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed by Keith and yourself regarding the nature of the state in its foreign policy. But I also agree with this:
“……we all make mistakes when we are too young to know any better. And given our media diet, how on earth could any young man have an objective view of military service? And the desire for approval is almost overwhelming in the young male, and we are very easily manipulated by it. You aren’t the only one.”
- Mooser
The point I was getting at all along was to say, the sentiment in moosers statement here is not necessarily shared among those on “the left”. There is a general excommunicatory (?) nature on the left of the credentialed classes – Which I Who I Am Referring To When I say “Left” – Mooser here seems more aware of the material reality in which a decision, one you think is completely free choice, to enlist is made.
Mooser, to answer your question – I would say, in this day and age, without a real left, a socialist left – the best way to describe our current left is by calling it the “tolerance” movement. In that it doesnt seek to really change anything about the antagonisms in the system, it just seeks to gloss over them, by being more ‘inclusive’ to the abstract social constructs we keep creating for ourselves, and at the same time helps us become more “tolerant” of our shittier and shittier collective existence. But this model in particular is very INTOLERANT to any display of what it considers brutish behavior – an ever changing goal post for sure – because Alpha Male behavior is bad for the overall Level of Tolerance. And so, when someone is outed as a Brute or a former Brute, the intolerance of the tolerant takes over.
Or at least thats what Ive noticed, having been a Marine, and having been “outed” as such in all sorts of company. I cant tell you how many times Ive heard, after having a conversation with someone on a random intellectual topic, “wow, im shocked you know something about this, I thought you jarheads were just a bunch of……” and so on. This was about why the left lacks a real anti-war message, and I think part of the answer is its an all volunteer military, “they chose to do it” and think the other part is that a sense of “well, they’re just a bunch of….” has taken hold on the “Tolerant” side.
Again, the post was about the Establishment Left aka The Tolerance Movement – I was not referring to everyday americans whose sympathies lie with traditional left liberal values.
My comment above should read todays Antiwar.com 29-o5-2012 not april. Sorry.
Gentile has a stellar review essay in The National Interest before last about the revanchist school of US-Vietnam War historians. link to nationalinterest.org
I do wish more antiwar liberals, radical and libertarians would learn at least a little bit the language of strategy. Strategic thinking is not always a lube for war, it can be the reverse. If we refuse to learn this powerful language we are being not moral but squeamish. Appeals to Americans’ self-interest are probably going to be more potent than appeals to international law or humanitarian compassion. I say this not to belittle law and compassion, but these arguments have cut little ice over the past 10 years, or perhaps over the past 5,000 years.
Btw terrific post Phil, many thanks–
“Strategic thinking is not always a lube for war, it can be the reverse.”
And once I perfect the program I’m working on which allows us to see the future infallibly, our strategic thinking should be even more suberb than it has been.
Thanks for a reminder that many in our military officer corps are truly professional insofar as they are not the close minded stick soldiers so many imagine them to be. When our political leaders, whether Cheney or Obama, authorize and promote torture and assassination, it puts officers in a bind when they are trying to instill in our soldiers that there are laws of war, let alone our Constitution, that make such doings illegal. Those officers also are well aware that acting as terrorists and torturers also does not work militarily since that is how we make more enemies for the American people.
Les, that’s ridiculous, completely ridiculous. Any officer who agreed with you (torture, assasination, war crimes, atrocities and the ruin and death of American men and women) should resign, not just be troubled by it. And they don’t.
Unfortunately, the opinions of our military leadership are too easily flushed from the bathroom of POTUS heart, often before he’s had a chance to turn around and examine them in detail – especially their opinions about fighting Israel’s wars. Here agian we see an American institution, the US military and its enlisted soldiers, being surrounded and muzzled by Zionists who pull rank with their credetials as civilian leaders at the State Department, Pentagon, White House, Congress… Why would a Zionist enlist when he can get a political science degree and become boss man to the generals? One more important advantage that favors grad students and Under Secretaries of Defense over enlisted men/women: they can advocate for fighting Israel’s wars without themselves risking a case of shattered nerves or missing limbs.
“Unfortunately, the opinions of our military leadership are too easily flushed from the bathroom of POTUS”
Yeah all those defense and intelligence officials are begging Obama at the “kill list” meetings every week not to do it. Sometimes they even threaten to frown at the thought of killing innocents.
If you are an officer, and you really think you are being asked to carry out illegal (let alone unprofitable) policies, you must resign. It’s not the same as a disagreement over what color to paint the walls in the office.
“If you are an officer, and you really think you are being asked to carry out illegal (let alone unprofitable) policies, you must resign.”…Mooser
Actually they have to do more than that….if asked by a superior officer to commit an act that would fall under a war crime you are required to refuse and report it to his superior.
It’s in the US Miliary Uniform Code….Hostage can probably find and identify the source for this more accurately.
“Actually they have to do more than that….if asked by a superior officer to commit an act that would fall under a war crime you are required to refuse and report it to his superior.”
Yeah, and look at Bradley Manning to see how the US reacts to its drones making independent determinations as to the morality of actions by the US…
“Yeah all those defense and intelligence officials are begging Obama at the “kill list” meetings every week not to do it.”
Yes, and those same “defense and intelligence officials” are also eager to study the data on how well our American weapons systems performed in the latest assault on the traditional testing grounds of Lebanon and Gaza. I’m not making the case that American military brass is a force for good or that its filled with people of high moral character. I’m saying that, in the wake of two disaterous wars, I’m sure there are fewer generals than there are members of Congress who are willing to call either Iraq or Afghanistan a strategic success. Even fewer who think going to war with Iran would make us “safer”, especially in light of the greif and destruction we now associate with Iraq and Afghanistan and how those wars have made us a more hated nation, not less. No matter what their motives might be, or the content of their moral fiber, I think we can safely say that the strategists at West Point aren’t under the influence of wealthy, powereful Zionists wispering in their ear, as is the case with POTUS and members of Congress.
“Not much,” Col. Gian P. Gentile, the director of West Point’s military history program and the commander of a combat battalion in Baghdad in 2006, said flatly in an interview last week. “Certainly not worth the effort. In my view.”
But not enough to make you resign? Then you’re a punk, and if you can live with yourself, you’re a psychopath. But of course, that’s pretty much a given for an officer.
Phil, I love ya! What a guy! So West Point is the “anti-war thinktank”, and a conversation around the Jewish dinner-table is gonna redeem Israel, and us happily (well, you can speak for yourself) married guys are the “losers” in the sexual sweepstakes.
You are one hell of a blithe spirit. It’s better to stay “forever young” than be the “neighborhood bully” of course, but sometimes I wonder if you couldn’t make the desert bloom solely with the precipitation from behind your auriculas. Oh well, perhaps the deeper meanings escape me. It wouldn’t be the first time.
Couple of quick comments concerning a thread which didn’t originally interest me until I was attracted to the extensive comments.
First, the discussion has been lively but a tad vitriolic in some cases. Of course that is not always bad as it tends to liven things up a bit for those who can forgive and forget.
Second, the notion that the military represents some sort restraint against imperial warmongering is delusional. A lot of this is internal squabbles over share of the “defense” budget. When high ranking military officers call for massive cuts in military spending, then I’ll laud them, not before. As for “liberal” institutions, they, like independent unions, have largely disappeared in the US. All you have left are the labels and little else.
Finally, a few words about “the left.” I have come to believe that many “lefties” misperceive what the designation refers to, erroneously imputing some sort of shared ideology. The reality is that the term “left” is a historical designation referring to the location in the French legislative assembly of various factions. On the “right” were the monarchists, on the “left” was everyone else usually thought to be reformers because of their opposition to the monarchy. That’s it. In its present usage, the “left” refers to widely divergent groups of people and ideological perspectives who, curiously, feel that they have much in common when, in fact, they don’t. This is one reason why it may be unwise to place too much emphasis on labels.