Somehow it seems to keep coming up. The war. And the difference between the war and the soldiers.
I know I shouldn't be surprised. I mean, it is a full-scale military conflict and my country is involved. But it seems like WWII was much more pervasive, affected everyone's life. I guess that's partially to do with the sense of invulnerability that Pearl Harbor had stripped America of and not knowing whether the war would be coming to your door. In that, the two wars should be similar. Not since the Civil War was the threat of the war being waged on American soil more real.
But since it's a neoguerre - as opposed to a paleoguerre - it all feels really remote. And while I'd love to take credit for such high-chocolate words as neoguerre and paleoguerre - it's Umberto Eco from whom I steal them and who has set me off on this war riff.
The paper had a review of a collection of his essays. I have to admit, it was pure chance that led me to read the article - the paper on the table in the coffee house was left open to that page. The reviewer was chiding Eco for his overly academic take on the world. They wanted to rally around him, the voice of rational liberalism to shut Anne Coulter the fuck up. But, no. Mr. Eco is too removed from reality. Eco speaks of a neoguerre - such as the war on terror- in which the wars are fought against an ill-defined enemy in an undefined arena and without knowable goals, as ones from which we are far removed. A reality TV show being produced by several governments in concert. The reviewer then feels the need to step in and say that the growing list of suicides due to PTSD (I'll come back to this in a minute), the amputations and the death make it clear that this is not a TV show for the ones in harms way. And there's a growing sense from the public that the neoguerre, unlike the paleoguerre of a WWII, is actually one from which we cannot remain isolated. If there is no definition of victory, it cannot end. If there is no defined battlefield, then everyone is a combatant.
And so the only way to win is to stop fighting.
But to those guys who are actually in Iraq or Afghanistan, what is the right thing to do? There's a lot of news recently about the large amount of suicides of returning soldiers. I haven't heard a lot of theories about why this is (although the remediation which the government proposes is to improve counselling). I don't think it's the problem of Vietnam in which returning soldiers were blamed for their part in the war. In which they wondered what they went through it all for. (Although, its probably a little bit of the latter.) No, I think it's probably more that these kids by and large are going from video games to real war, and the difference is a little shocking. The world is messy, but the demands of our entertainment industry have convinced people that it's not.
So, I'm in a Starbucks and they ask if I want to buy a pound of coffee to be sent to the troops in Iraq. And I'm torn. I know it seems stupid, but don't the small things you do show whether you're for something or against something. But I'm not against the guys having a cup of coffee. Most of them are just kids. But then, if you make it easier for them (sending cell phones as some highschool students have organized, so that they can call their families easier), are you prolonging the war? If there are no soldiers, is there a war?
And then my nephew enlists. My mom doesn't understand why I'm not surprised. If I were him, I would probably be tempted to do the same. For or against, the Iraq war is the defining event for his generation. On the front lines or leading the protests, just not on the sidelines. Now, for him, I don't think he's considered the drudgery. Most importantly, I don't think he's considered that he's gonna have to take orders for a long time from people who are not nearly as bright as he is. I know it seems silly to think in these terms, but you can't convince an 18-year-old about the dangers, because, they're right: life is dangerous and what's a long life worth if you don't do anything with it? Nor can you even tell them about losing a limb. How can someone relate to that? When you're 18, you figure it's either not going to happen to you, or it will be - in some way - cool.
So, no. I don't want him to go. I want him to go to college and to put all of his energy toward finding a way to change to American definition of war, of terror and of patriotism. But most of all, I don't want him to do nothing.
So, I'm torn. I think the war is a mess. I think that international politics are more complicated then they have ever been because we have a greater interdependency, we have a greater knowledge of each other, but we have less understanding. We also have a sense, as cultures begin to intermingle, that we are losing something. Nothing on this earth dies easy. And the cultures which are going away are fighting for their lives right now - fundamental religions, isolationism, untrammelled free markets. Things will be messy for a while. Maybe our whole lives. But there seems to be a social homeostasis which works as well. It's just the perspective we need is beyond the number of years we have.
Oh, and in the end, I didn't buy the coffee. But that could be because I'm cheap.
3 comments:
I don't think you should worry too much about not buying the coffee, from all I read the troops out there are not hurting for coffee, burgers, fried chicken or toasted subs and companies like star bucks certainly are not hurting from the outsourcing of military logistics like mess-hall, instead buy your boys a book :-) I wish your cousin well, and hope he returns safely from his eventual overseas deployment - I am sure it's highly likely he'll end up in-theatre if not, unfortunatley, inevitable.
In the end I am happy to be back home where the biggest political issue is related to the manner in which the 'prime minister' acquired 48,000 pre-Euro pounds during the breakup of his marraige 25 or so years ago. Not that the US issues are not felt beyond the borders - but with distsance comes perspective. I look forward to many years of interest revelations from the inquests and investigations to come under future administrations - my how I will enjoy the "told-you-so's",
I could go on to ruminate about the suicide rates, but that would drag my comment into the realms of 'blog' maybe we'll take it up at a later date.
Suffice to say it was nice chatting to you earlier, I wish you and yours the very best for new year and it's preceeding festivities - Jingle Bells yerman
War on terror (whatever that means) will not progress through blood and guts, it must be through hearts and minds. We see this war slowly evolving in that direction. We can only hope this transformation will be successful over time and our troops can be viewed by the majority as ambassadors of positive change rather than war mongers. This is an optimistic view, because if the tables were turned...
On the other hand, what other choice do you have when you wage a war on 'terror'?
My neighbor, the freshman child of a huge Bush supporter, was selling popcorn as a Boy Scout fundraiser. We love him and his family even though they are so conservative :-) An option he offered was to purchase a can (at $25) for the families of the troops. I told him he should watch for people who have those "Support our Troops" stickers on their cars and approach them to put their money where their mouths are.
In terms of the soldiers versus the war, I support the individuals who choose to serve our country in the way they believe best by serving in Iraq. I do not support their activities there, and I am personally grateful to them, as I have read in Dear Abby that I should be. I don't believe they are protecting us, and in most cases I believe in their naivete they are merely tools for US corporations making a profit on the sufferings of the Iraqi people- and the US soldiers for that matter.
Maybe you are right in the video game versus reality theory of why soldiers are so distraught when they return, but even if this is the whole story, it speaks to the limited consciousness of Americans. I think most soldiers sign up to serve because they think they can make a difference in the world, because our government, who they trusted, told them they are needed to help the Iraqi people. Then they get there, and maybe they see Black Water security abusing human life without any conscience and without any need because our government supports and pays them to do so. Or maybe they watch Haliburton employees making a fortune doing activities that struggling Iraqis could easily but aren't allowed. I believe that they feel deceived by Bush (he's a Christian man, for God's sake!), by Fox news (the most trusted source on TV!) by their moms and dads who also believed we also need to be the "Best Generation", but who neglected to give them tools to discern who is telling us the truth. They are more deceived and betrayed than if their wife slept with their best friend or they find out their dad isn't really their dad. And they come home to people who don't understand what they've been through, because God-fearing George Bush wouldn't lie to them.
All that being said, we have a good friend whose son was a Naval Academy graduate who served in Iraq- and his personal experience was the Iraqis loved the soldiers and we were doing a lot of good there. Maybe that's the difference between educated soldiers and guys right out of high school who spent their childhoods playing video games. He asked-not for coffee or popcorn, but for crayons for the Iraqi kids. That was easy to support.
Post a Comment