Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- In Blind Poll, Republicans Choose Progressive Budget Solutions Over Their Own Party's
- Not Guilty By Virtue of Videotape, Which, Unlike the Police, Doesn't Lie
- Manning: Before Wikileaks, Leaked Docs Offered to NYT, WaPo
- Bob Woodward Embodies US Political Culture in a Single Outburst
- State Dept. Releases Keystone XL Environmental Impact Statement
Popular content
Today's Top News
Replace the War System: Why and How
About the murderous rampage of U.S. soldiers from the 5th Stryker Combat Brigade who killed and dismembered Afghani civilians, evidently “for sport,” the Santa Rosa Press Democrat reported on September 20th, “Army officials have not disclosed a motive” for the outrage. Let me try.
Violence is puzzling when we can’t see the forest for the trees. If we focus on just this event – and it’s certainly a shocker – we may not realize that it’s part of a much larger pattern, to see which we want to take a step back – in fact, in two – to get the whole picture.
What these men did is only one of many signs of breakdown in both our long-drawn-out wars in the Middle East. In Iraq, for example, from a report filed by McClatchy’s Washington Bureau on September 17th:
- Drug and alcohol abuse in the ranks, and the associated misdemeanor offenses, have risen alarmingly in the nine-year course of the war. "Drug and alcohol abuse is [now] a significant health problem in the Army," stated a 350-page report the Army released in July.
- Sexual assault tripled in the period 2001-2009; and most telling:
- So did suicide. There were 148 Army suicides in the first six months of this year and the toll is expected to surpass last year’s grim total of 160.
Moreover, record numbers of veterans from both wars “broken,” dysfunctional, unable to work, to stay in relationships, or out of jail.
At least, the Army is starting to lend some humane attention to these men and women, after a decade of denial and neglect. Said Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the vice chief of staff of the Army,
We can't use these people up, have them develop a problem and then throw them away and not take care of them. There is no way. I can't be part of an organization like that. Part of the reason they're having the problem is the situation we put them into.
And what is that situation? These soldiers lose it because they were put into a war that should never have been fought. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – and our leaders knew it. Similarly, it was not necessary to destroy the entire Taliban movement – assuming that military force could accomplish such a thing – to capture Osama bin Laden (which, of course, has not happened anyway).
But to get the final answer, we have to step back yet again. We have to recognize that there is such a thing as moral progress. Slavery was considered normal from the earliest records of history down to the nineteenth century of our era, when a small band of Quakers in London started a movement that broke the spell and suddenly brought to light the horror of enslaving another human being. Slavery still happens, but that’s because of other factors; it was formally abolished in the nineteenth century because the time was right for people to wake up and stop looking on a whole race of human beings as objects, as possessions.
Today we are reaching a similar crisis with the institution of war; despite appearances, people are becoming more aware that we cannot solve problems by waging war on them. If you are not aware that this is happening, you are not alone; watch any news or “entertainment” program and you’ll see that competition, violence, and war are still considered “normal.” It’s rare to spot nonviolent alternative methods, since they are so rarely featured in mainstream media.
It is significant that a good number of the troubled veterans we just mentioned are not suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), exactly, but a variant recently uncovered by psychologist Rachel McNair that she calls PITS: Perpetration Induced Traumatic Stress. Simply put, when we do violence against others we are in some psychological way hurting ourselves – and that pain is becoming more evident as the patina of glory surrounding war wears off. One brigade commander correctly pointed out that the drug problem is “just a symptom of the disease." But the name of the disease is not dysfunctional leaders or lax discipline or a particular conflict that should not have been fought; it’s war.
Back when he was campaigning, soon-to-be President Obama said that we must “not only end war (in Iraq) but end the mindset that lead to war.” Of course, he did nothing of the kind. And so it’s up to us.
I encourage anyone who hasn’t already done so to familiarize him- or herself with the alternatives to war that fall into three broad categories: 1) living more lightly on the earth, since most wars today are fought over its diminishing resources; 2) diplomacy, mediation, and international institutions that can keep disputes from turning into wars, and 3) nonviolent mechanisms to deal with the wars that nonetheless break out, like the unarmed interventions just mentioned that are helping to reduce violence in trouble spots all over the world now. I recommend that we all learn about these things and talk about them with family, friends, and our congressmen or women. You may not get anything but raised eyebrows at first, but remember what Gandhi said about a real innovation: “First they ignore you; then they laugh at you; then they fight you – and then you win.” Provided you have learned to fight nonviolently. That must be the subject of another article.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...




64 Comments so far
Show AllIn order to "change the war system" we must change the mythology.
Instead of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic system based on the Old Testament, stating that 'God created mankind and told them to go out and dominate the earth' (and everything in it, from animals to minerals, to each other) we need a new mythology- one that says,
'The mysterious Source divided itself into parts, each of which awakened into consciousness as if it were a separate individual,forgetting that it is an extension of the One.
Each one's task is to reconnect with its identity with the Source, to remember, and thus to realize that WE ARE ALL EACH OTHER; therefore that we will do best if we cooperate with one another and harmonize, rather than struggle.
"The alternatives to war that fall into three broad categories: 1) living more lightly on the earth, since most wars today are fought over its diminishing resources; 2) diplomacy, mediation, and international institutions that can keep disputes from turning into wars, and 3) nonviolent mechanisms to deal with the wars that nonetheless break out, like the unarmed interventions just mentioned that are helping to reduce violence in trouble spots all over the world now."
To comment on the above, In my opinion, 1) it is fine to go easy on the ecology…it is a personal choice but has nothing to do with war; 2) when to parties are bent on warring with one another, no third party can stop them by any means other than direct, armed, physical intervention or massive economic intervention…in either case, by force rather than reason; 3) I have little doubt that such activity can soften and reduce violence but only after violence has manifest.
Regarding war, from the commander and chief at the top all the way through the echelons down to the most basic foot soldier, war is fought because people like to do it; they hunger for it. War permits the expression of the dark side of human consciousness. If we want to prevent war, we need to find another way of satisfying the human hunger to express aggression. Apparently, vicarious expression via movies, video games, rough sports and other roll play games fall far short of human need.
These are all rationalizations used to justify going to war. Rationalizations to justify going to war are highly evolved and have been evolving since the first tribe how many million years ago? Waring is the primal motivator. In war you can kill the enemy. Some military men do speak out and admit they enjoy killing the enemy. Others hide their joy behind moral and ethical arguments while they are out there killing the enemy. "Psychopath" is a word used to cloak the primal passion to kill that is part of each and every one of us by those in denial. A true psychopath no matter what else he or she may do, at very least breaks the law. What makes him or her a psychopath is that he or she believes it's OK to break the law. If a psychopath is a killer, it is a primal thirst for blood that drives him or her to kill. It is the same thirst for blood that motivates a warrior which is what a soldier is. But Soldiers are not psychopaths, unless they break the law and express their blood lust illegally. Every one of us is a potential psychopath, however. That should be clear.
I remember a friend who worked in Vietnam as a seabee. A lot of Vietnamese hid in self-made caverns when the conflict came close. GIs went down those holes and often got wounded or killed doing so. So my friend devised a way of planting charges in the holes and burying whoever and whatever was down there alive. "I saved a lot of American lives," he said proudly. He felt no remorse for the hundreds or perhaps thousands of men, women and children he buried alive. Was he a psychopath?
Look at the history of Nanking and the Japanese invasion and occupation. Listen to the testimony of some of the Japanese soldiers who survive today. Bayoneting civilians became easier as time went one...it became ordinary and I suspect even enjoyable. Some of the soldiers developed quite a penchant for cutting off heads with a single swipe of their swords.
"the vast majority of most people do feel regret and empathy if such occurs" you say. This is one side of the coin. The other side, the dark side which we keep hidden from view, is quite another animal. In Nanking there was a whole occupying Japanese army whose favorite pastime was rape. It all depends on the conditions around you. When rape was the norm, rape was cool. When bayoneting was the norm, it was cool too.
There are countless examples of this kind in the annals of history.
Dont get me wrong. I am not advocating violence. I am just saying we need to somehow begin to take a take a deep look, and an honest look at that part of us that gets pleasure from inflicting pain. Then, perhaps, we will begin to unravel the complexities of our being and begin to solve the war problem.