Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Why Are We Still at War?
The United States began its war in Afghanistan 88 months ago. "The war on terror" has no sunset clause. As a perpetual emotion machine, it offers to avenge what can never heal and to fix grief that is irreparable.
For the crimes against humanity committed on Sept. 11, 2001, countless others are to follow, with huge conceits about technological "sophistication" and moral superiority. But if we scrape away the concrete of media truisms, we may reach substrata where some poets have dug.
W.H. Auden: "Those to whom evil is done / Do evil in return."
Stanley Kunitz: "In a murderous time / the heart breaks and breaks / and lives by breaking."
And from 1965, when another faraway war got its jolt of righteous escalation from Washington's certainty, Richard Farina wrote: "And death will be our darling and fear will be our name." Then as now came the lessons that taught with unfathomable violence once and for all that unauthorized violence must be crushed by superior violence.
The U.S. war effort in Afghanistan owes itself to the enduring "war on terrorism," chasing a holy grail of victory that can never be.
Early into the second year of the Afghanistan war, in November 2002, a retired U.S. Army general, William Odom, appeared on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" program and told viewers: "Terrorism is not an enemy. It cannot be defeated. It's a tactic. It's about as sensible to say we declare war on night attacks and expect we're going to win that war. We're not going to win the war on terrorism."
But the "war on terrorism" rubric -- increasingly shortened to the even vaguer "war on terror" -- kept holding enormous promise for a warfare state of mind. Early on, the writer Joan Didion saw the blotting of the horizon and said so: "We had seen, most importantly, the insistent use of Sept. 11 to justify the reconception of America's correct role in the world as one of initiating and waging virtually perpetual war."
There, in one sentence, an essayist and novelist had captured the essence of a historical moment that vast numbers of journalists had refused to recognize -- or, at least, had refused to publicly acknowledge. Didion put to shame the array of self-important and widely lauded journalists at the likes of the New York Times, the Washington Post, PBS and National Public Radio.
The new U.S. "war on terror" was rhetorically bent on dismissing the concept of peacetime as a fatuous mirage.
Now, in early 2009, we're entering what could be called Endless War 2.0, while the new president's escalation of warfare in Afghanistan makes the rounds of the media trade shows, preening the newest applications of technological might and domestic political acquiescence.
And now, although repression of open debate has greatly dissipated since the first months after 9/11, the narrow range of political discourse on Afghanistan is essential to the Obama administration's reported plan to double U.S. troop deployments in that country within a year.
"This war, if it proliferates over the next decade, could prove worse in one respect than any conflict we have yet experienced," Norman Mailer wrote in his book "Why Are We at War?" six years ago. "It is that we will never know just what we are fighting for. It is not enough to say we are against terrorism. Of course we are. In America, who is not? But terrorism compared to more conventional kinds of war is formless, and it is hard to feel righteous when in combat with a void..."
Anticipating futility and destruction that would be enormous and endless, Mailer told an interviewer in late 2002: "This war is so unbalanced in so many ways, so much power on one side, so much true hatred on the other, so much technology for us, so much potential terrorism on the other, that the damages cannot be estimated. It is bad to enter a war that offers no clear avenue to conclusion. ... There will always be someone left to act as a terrorist."
And there will always be plenty of rationales for continuing to send out the patrols and launch the missiles and drop the bombs in Afghanistan, just as there have been in Iraq, just has there were in Vietnam and Laos. Those countries, with very different histories, had the misfortune to share a singular enemy, the most powerful military force on the planet.
It may be profoundly true that we are not red states and blue states, that we are the United States of America -- but what that really means is still very much up for grabs. Even the greatest rhetoric is just that. And while the clock ticks, the deployment orders are going through channels.
For anyone who believes that the war in Afghanistan makes sense, I recommend the Jan. 30 discussion on "Bill Moyers Journal" with historian Marilyn Young and former Pentagon official Pierre Sprey. A chilling antidote to illusions that fuel the war can be found in the transcript.
Now, on Capitol Hill and at the White House, convenience masquerades as realism about "the war on terror." Too big to fail. A beast too awesome and immortal not to feed.
And death will be our darling. And fear will be our name.
- Posted in
101 Comments so far
Show Alljmartin
Very good question, why are we still at war? What are we trying to prove? What is the criteria for deciding the war is won? We must save face so we must be able to claim that we have won the war. When will we demand that our government stop bombing innocent men, women and children? War solves nothing. War is a violent, destructive force. War is hell's answer to problems between peoples and nations.
There is a tremendous need for schools, hospitals, housing, etc. around this world. Instead of stepping up and fulfilling those needs we are building bombs to destroy and tear down what has been built. It is foolish in the extreme. Our foreign policy is in shambles. We must demand a drastic change from our leaders.
Why are we still at war? Because it's profitable to those in power.
Took the words right out of my fingers...
ShadowDancer 10:08 Can it be any better than Buffy Sainte Marie's "Up Where We Belong"?
"...only passing through...", sure. I liked your observation in another post about back in the day when certain First Nation tribes where still able to perceive, and use as a basis for rejecting, the following Nation's thinking process that was castrated from the Earth atmosphere's life force and thus unconscionable. Luckily there are some forms of human development, some not so far from the mainstream, that are suturing that catastrophic divide. Thanks for your observations and your just passing through; also for your strength to be able to shun others attempts to entice you to war - peace out friend.
War is the perfect Capitalist tool. Goods are made and destroyed. How perfect is that? NO good use, just destroyed while destroying.
Anyway, Norm, did not you support Mr. Obama with all your heart? You need to apologizes.
The USA can't pay for these wars and have a viable economy, too. We are at the point where we will become a totalitarian war economy or a peaceful country in a world community.
Looks like Mr. Obama is bringing us to the former.
"Anyway, Norm, did not you support Mr. Obama with all your heart? You need to apologizes. "
As an Obama supporter, I'm coming to see Mr. Soloman as a sort of hypocritical backstabber. He was very pro-Obama (a delegate no less!) and anti-Nader/McKinney before the election. Yet now he's ranting like a madman against Obama's policies towards Afghanistan and Israel. Even though Obama's positions were clearly expressed during the campaign!
It strikes me as rather duplicitous and condescending of him to hide his criticisms of Obama until after the election. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad he supported Obama, and perhaps it was good for the campaign. But it seems manipulative and it makes me not trust him.
Bring America Back !!!! Very pertinent commentary by Solomon. The analogy
to Lyndon Johnson is very much appropriate. His military commanders lied
to him on numbers of additional troops needed to win Vietnam. they lied to falsify body counts, their intransigence led to the massacre at Mai Lai !!!
***When Johnson finally realized he had been put in the Bag by his own advisors, he then could not muster enough intestinal fortitude to run for his full term as President. Despite his civil rights advances domestically, Vietnam was his failure, and the first War the USA ever lost !!!
***The answer to the question is we are at war because Obama backed off his main campaign promise to end this War !!! They don't call the pentagon the
"puzzle palace" for nothing, and the Neocon War Machine Elite were only too
pleased to hear Obama would merely shift our presence to Afghanistan. They can roll with that for at least his hitch as 'you know what' !!!!
***We voted for a complete change and what we got was the third term of good old
William Clinton Clinton had Republican Wm Cohen as Sec Def, so gee, it must be okay to keep Robert Gates over there. Sec State Hillary voted for the War,
romanced the Head Cheerleader Rupert Murdoch during her campaign, lied about her travel to Iraq==therefore she will be a whiz bang Cabinet Secretary for the new Barak.
***Look, any time Rush Limbaugh and Karl Rove heap praise on the new Prez for
his cabinet picks of Clinton and Gates==what does that tell us ?? If Rove and Limbaugh like it===DO NOT DO IT...and they were both pleased as punch at both those appointments.. THey were also gleeful at the prospect that General Hayden might be left to honcho the CIA, but not so much at Panetta..that tells you Obama did the right thing at that Agency !!!
***Also, anybody who still thinks that a cave dwelling boogieman and 19 airline flunkouts cold pull off the technical genius that was 9/11==still believes in Dragons and Dinosaurs !!!
***Solomon, Moyers, Sprey, and Young come close enough to touch upon the real reason we are still at War==but they are shell shocked enough by mainstream
media not to tread on the Truth too much. But they all know in their little hearts that Sept 11, 2001, is the answer to the question.
***The smoking gun of 9/11 is and was Bldg 7, WTC. The real terrorists were in occupancy of that building up to that day !!!
***With the team Obama has picked, he has about as much chance to change the
Pentagon War Machine as Blago has of getting elected Mayor of Chicago !
Barak is indeed a pseudo Lyndon Johnson, and if those cave bombings in Pakistan are his way to slay the Dragon, which King George didn't, then someone should enlighten the Prez before Pakistan exercises a Nuke !
Truth 11: 15 If only we were bombing caves in Pakistan instead of the middle of towns or residential compounds as we are. ---- Thanks --------- Peace-
"Vietnam was his failure, and the first War the USA ever lost !!!"
Did we really win the Korean war...?
We are still at war because the soldiers are still fighting. That is where it has to start, when they say no to their officers them the war will be over.
And when the voters in America say no to the one party, war and corporate party and vote everyone of those scum-bags in Washington out of office.
Doctor 11:29 Do you know that a great determinant for evacuating Vietnam was that the enlisted men were fragging(killing) their officiers ( I do not condone violence)? Many under the influence of CIA provided drugs.
Yesterday I posted that we need to approach the approachable linchpin in the coporate dictatorship, police,soldiers,teachers,councilpeople etc.--------Thanks ----------Peace --------------
We have always been at war with Oceania.
Remember, an end to war and defunding of the pentagon would cause a crashing down of the economy surpassing even recent slides. Don't think Obama isn't keenly aware of this. Look in your own backyard. The military/industrial complex employs your neighbors and mine. War is entrenched in the U.S. economy. Blood for profit. Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Gaza, quagmires all, intended to fuel the insatiable lust for corporate profit, period...
Horsehockey. The Imperial budget is what's causing the implosion of the US economy, not the other-way-round.
And it gets worse:
President Obama intends to adopt a tougher line toward Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, as part of a new American approach to Afghanistan that will put more emphasis on waging war than on development, senior administration officials said Tuesday...They said that the Obama administration would work with provincial leaders as an alternative to the central government, and that it would leave economic development and nation-building increasingly to European allies, so that American forces could focus on the fight against insurgents.
Of course, the views (PDF) of the majority of Afghans--who want to "jaw, jaw, not to war, war"--don't count much for much in DC.
Please ---- m156 11:44--- Freedom Fighters not insurgents; we must not speak the language of the beast. or sorry is that a quote?
Right. The "insurgents" are NATO troops.
I think it best to use accurate terms in reference too existing law, and terms that are somewhat neutral.
Here are some ideas about terms:
US military forces in Afghanistan:
Occupation forces
Occupation soldiers
Occupying forces
Occupying soldiers
Invading forces
Invading soldiers
US mercenaries in Afghanistan:
US mercenaries
US mercenary forces
Government soldiers and police:
Puppet soldiers or forces
Puppet government forces or soldiers
Collaborating soldiers or forces
Collaborator soldiers or forces
Native Afghan anti-US, anti-NATO forces:
Resistance fighters
Resistance
Afghanistan militia members
Imported Afghan anti-US, anti-NATO forces:
Muslim (or Islamic) militia members
Muslim (or Islamic) mercenaries
Just like good ole' Vietnam. Only when the expenses become too much for even the elites to bear will it end. Maybe a faster Peak Oil collapse is sorely needed?
We cannot say Obama lied. He told us he was going to do exactly as he is doing - most thought he was 'just making campaign rhetoric' to get elected and would do the 'right' thing after he was in office.
Guess what?
It would be to the benefit of all civilians in all of these countries to wage peace. Since that would not put big bucks in the pockets of the oligarchy controlling the 'free' economy of the world, it won't happen, dooming the proles of the world to everlasting famine, war, pestilence and terror.
But I could be wrong !
US wars continue so long as there is loot (usually from the US taxpayer) for the US boss class to grab.
Wake up and rise up.
Sneaker 12:03 Exactly correct without donations from the USA citizenry they are less potent than limp appendages. ----------- Thanks -------- Peace ------
"The Business of America is Business." And since 1940, the leading business of the US Empire is WAR. Essentially, The War Of Terror started in 1940 and has yet to stop, through its several incarnations. In the 1930s, the US citizenry was able to elect enough like-minded congresscritters to enact the New Deal, and clamp down on rampant capitalism and its banksters and death merchants through several very revealing investigations eary in FDR's first term. This resulted in the somewhat poorly crafted Neutrality Acts that were meant to put teeth into the Kellog-Briand Treaty that outlawed war as an extension of foriegn policy. FDR showed his true colors when he cited the Neutrality Acts as his reason to NOT support the Republican forces in the Spanish Civil War, and he worked thereafter to undermine them instead of correct their faults. And to ensure the US citizenry didn't attempt to return to their clearminded attitude of the mid-1930s, the US Propaganda System used the newly minted Anti-Communist Crusade to install the National Security State in 1947.
Some reading this comment will ask themselves, Why didn't we learn more about what went on during the 1930s aside from the suffering during the Depression and FDR's New Deal attempts to solve it? I will answer that you are not meant to learn about those events. Grad school seminars don't go there unless one or more of the students digs into the timeperiod and asks why are we not looking more deeply into that era. The two great Congressional investigations--The Pecora Commission and Nye Committee--haven't had one mass-market book written about their very important revelations. Here is a good book about the latter, but note that it lists for over $110. And here is a tidbit about the Nye Committee, whose leader remarked: "when the Senate investigation is over, we shall see that war and preparation for war is not a matter of national honor and national defense, but a matter of profit for the few." Nye was a Republican!! One need only look at the types of video "games" being offered and other media that preceded them to understand how we are manipulated into supporting the death industry against our own interest. Englehardt's End of Victory Culture digs deeply into this aspect of our indoctrination. The only way we can get out is to know how we got in.
The Empire MUST DIE for the republic to live.
Karlof1 12:05 -------- Good analysis of the thirties. But one glaring mistake , the war of terror started with columbus with the resulting deaths of 20 to 100 Million Native Americans in North America alone.
And there was a little known reign of terror by the Texas Rangers and company in the early 1900's killing around 5,000 Hispanic Americans; in order to steal their lands.
Finally the African American has suffered a reign of terror since they were shackled in Africa.
In that case, don't forget Southwest Asia's experience with terror during the Mongol invasion, most of Europe's at the hand of the Roman Empire, Rome's at the hands of Attila, etc. Come on man, focus on what we are actually responsible for and can influence.
zmann 12:45 Columbus is relevant because it is the beginning of genocidal state terror on this continent by foreign powers( the Aztecs did practice genocidal state terror). The historical thread is continuous and the dynamics are basically unchanged except now we have corporations ruling the empire rather than monarchys. I was responding to a glaringly inaccurrate statement that the War of Terror started in the thirties. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Sadly we are one of the most hideously repeative nations ever to exist and the knowledge and acceptance of that is the first step in moving to the light.
As far as influence, quantum physics is proposing that we can influence past events, so maybe we can.
Glenn Ford wrote: "the Aztecs did practice genocidal state terror"
Actually, the Aztecs had a sophisticated system of trade, merchants who were authorized by the state to make treaties, a more advanced system of sewage and waste recycling, a more effective agricultural system, a more complex education system, and a more horizontal power structure than anything at that time in Europe.
The image of the Aztec government as a "genocidal state terror" came from the Spanish, who described and wrote falsely about much of what we've been taught--human sacrifices, cannibalism, terror. Many of these writings were done up to one hundred or more years after the actual invasion.
The reasons an invading nation must vilify the *enemy* and make them seem *unholy* and *evil* are many, but the main one is the justification of the invasion in the first place. You can't go in and steal the resources of people who have eons of culture and civilization without lying and lying and lying--whether it's the Aztecs or the Iraqis and Afghanis.
It was done then and it's being done now.
Read the book 1491 for a clearer picture of how Cortez overcame the Aztec Empire. Examine the outright lies and mis-statements in our history books right now that lead us to believe the fantasy.
Educate yourself about why we're being lied to. Then become pro-active to change what's happening...and happening...and happening.
Seaseal
Sioux Rose
KARLOF1: Excellent post. Thank you for the references.
The most striking aspect of the 1930s is the revelation of the very impressive, steadfast, and widespread US public's yearning for peace and its rejection of the militarists. This existed because the public had yet to be drowned in militarist-based propaganda of the type so widespead today promoted through TV and other video media that didn't yet exist then; a viewing of what were called Newsreels easilly reveals their bias toward war. Thus the very sucessful pacifism of the times must be trashed as "isolationism" in history books and by equally untaught teachers. I consider myself very lucky to have had enlightened and deeply informed teachers--endangered species nowadays.
Sioux Rose
KARLOF: Thank you for the elaboration. The power of TV to mesmerize audiences and effectively institute mind control can only be understated. It has undoubtedly played a huge role in the dissemination of soft and hard propaganda so as to "manufacture consent."
The American Empire is the mortal enemy to the "land of the free".
We can see the bottom line here.
War for war's sake will continue until a brave leader can somehow prove peace is more profitable.
http://davedubya.com
-- the enduring "war on terrorism," chasing a holy grail of victory that can never be. --
I have posted repeatedly about this. In Congress's words, the war's goal is 'preventing future terrorism' by our announced enemies (al-Qaeda and the Taliban).
Nobody yet has defined or explained how 'future terrorism' can be eradicated. Thus, victory is unachievable. Defeat is unthinkable, and all that's left for strategy is 'more of the same', more troops, more money, more death.
The wording 'War on terror' is a packaging gimmick to make this war more palatable and less understandable to the American consumer. America's enemies are indeed al-Qaeda and the Taliban, but the most descriptive and accurate war names don't sell well.
'War against those we hold responsible for 9/11'. 'War against al-Qaeda and the Taliban'. See? Not the most notable of names.
It is good to see this article here. While the government and the military (which awards a medal for service in the 'war on terrorism') wage this global and expanding war, too many Americans (including progressives) ignore this insane and unwinnable war or deny its very existence.
We the people must bring this madness into the light of day. Only we can end this before the inevitable catastrophe.
War on terror. War on drugs. War on poverty. War on crime. As has been said, but not often enough, war is always on people.
Locust 12:27 -------- Al Qaeda is an enemy but Taliban was not an enemy until we invaded their country. They never threatened or as far as we know supported an attack against us until we began to slaughter them and their citizens. See picture of bush shaking hands with Taliban at Crawford Ranch. Before we attacked the Taliban we were in peaceful negotiations for a pipeline. Please pardon me if you were quoting and not proclaiming. -------- Thanks ----------- Peace --------
Can I suggest that we are our own enemy? We have no enemies until we created them. The Taliban were our friends, who single-handedly almost eliminated global opium poppy trading. What were once friends, are now enemies. When speaking of the English, Germany and Japan, the converse is true.
It is our foreign policy that is screwed, and that is what is creating our "enemies". Solving our foreign policy woes will go along way to creating a garden of peace here on Earth.
But that is not the agenda of our leaders.
Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in their moccasins - Native American proverb.
Don't forget, Iraq is in no way "secure". Who would bet against the probability that, once we remove troops from Iraq and send them to Afghanistan, Iraq will once again explode? (As "curmudgeon" says, "I could be wrong.") Who would bet against the probability that, if or when Iraq explodes again, Obama will feel compelled to reinsert troops? Who remembers the statements from several years ago that our military is stretched to the breaking point? Is is broken yet? How much longer?
We're at war, Norman, because 'intellectuals' like yourself couldn't find time to spend away from their writings about why we just had to vote Democratic Party once again to actually go out and help build a Movement to take back the country from the Democratic and Republican Party corporate machine.
Solomon is a "sunshine" progressive. I don't trust him, especially if the going gets rough, he'd ditch you in a heartbeat to save his own ass then tell stories of how heroic he was.
Except that he died, in 2007, I think it was. Anyway, he won't be offering any further wisdom on why we get into the self-defeating wars we habitually do.
He left out oil, war profiteering and religious Crusades.
"War is the health of the nation".
(someone not worthy of remembering)
It was Randolph Bourne, and the quote was "War is the health of the state." He's well worth remembering and should be read still. He was one of the most trenchant critics of the US's involvement in WW1.
Thank you. I think I stand corrected.
Why are we still at war? 1. Because of the greed and industrial,selfishness of the greedy profits made by American corporations i.e. Lockheed,Boeing,Raytheon,G.E. ect. 2. Because we have a U.S. government that is for the corporations; by the corporations; and of the corporations. 3. Most in Congress, are nothing more than crooked attorneys that work for these corporations while pretending to be representatives of the people all the while violating the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. 4. The whore MSM that is a cheer leader and propaganda tool for war. 5. The American people that are led believe that war is patriotic and your duty no matter how egregious. 6. The hypocritical, churches and evangelicals that condone killing and are the puppets and sychophants of war.
Sioux Rose
PAUL R: Thank you for building the case for MARS rules... and it's in treason to the holy circle which grants equal Divinity to a number of archetypal forces, those that champion life rather than death and destruction, were the lessons of the circle and its model of inclusion the basis for how we form and organize human societies.
Sioux R. I do not know much about astrology, but if Mars is the astrological sign for war he sure does rule! I have come to one conclusion and that is: You cannot change the world, you can only change yourself and like Mahatma Gandhi said:" be the change you want to see in the world " or from my perspective, let there be peace and let it begin with me. How can one expect the world to be peaceful, if he is not a peaceful person?
Sioux Rose
One lonely peaceful person in a raging mob given to war is NOT a great or easy position, nor status I'd essentially cherish. I try to be a peaceful person (anger at injustice is something I have to grapple with as have the great ones; I mean Jesus tossed over the tables of the moneychangers in the temples) and also work towards a just, peaceful society. To the Bahai, the teacher is a high calling, and those of us who try to teach by word and example perhaps help to evolve a future generation that will not fall into the trap of "the sins of their ancestors."
Mars indeed is the 'god' of war, and the feminine version, Athena, is a goddess who champions it as well... as in not Hello Dolly, but Hello Condi, Hilary, Margaret T, and too many others. So there is a feminine archetype that IS pro war. And there are masculine archetypes that are thoughtful caring nurturers. Venus and Mars, like Moon and sun present the most obvious case(s) for ostensible polarity. The circle reconciles all positions taken to be irreconcilably opposed, or otherwise divorced.
"... Hello Condi, Hilary, Margaret T,..." see(?), here's a go at it...human names and human faces, much easier(though still difficult) and functional for coalescing a human based action as opposed to the de-humanized(impossible for coalescence) symbolism of "Lockheed,Boeing,Raytheon,G.E." - one way is The Path, the other another addition to the catastrophic War Of Terror mythology. "The circle reconciles" with humans having the power of choice to choose the how of The Circle. Two how's: pushing Sisyphus' Rock through one of Dante's stench shit strewn cantos, or human recognition.
"Why are we still at war?" Partly, greatly, due to the fact We continually fall into the de-humanization trap as exemplified by answer #1: "1. Because of the greed and industrial,selfishness of the greedy profits made by American corporations i.e. Lockheed,Boeing,Raytheon,G.E. ect" - while the corporate structure helps construct and funnel certain thought forms and thus actions, these thought forms still have a human basis. To target corporations and not the human behavior and human recognition as to the corporate construct, is similar to the de-humanizing and obscuring effect of the "war on terror" slogans, not very functional for overcoming the spinning wheels caught in the groove of war.
Also nothing said about the weapons of war provided our parent state of Isreal(51st state?). Just watch the stock of our defense contractors whenever we unleash the IDF.
But I could be wrong !