If you grew up during the 90s like I did (where mah 33-year-olds at?!), you grew up hearing and seeing "the cowboys and Arabs draw down on each other at noon" in the background noise and visuals on the news. In my experience, there was always a voice, be it on the TV or the living room, declaring that the latest scuffle between the West and the Middle East would lead to World War III. Thus far, it hasn't happened. Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm in 1990-91 were brief expulsions of Iraq from Kuwait, and when another, far bigger, all-out war began in 2003 with the US invasion of Iraq, it was far from a "world war," as a surprising number of nations refused to join the coalition. Yet, to this day, each US brush with a foreign power leads many to declare a Third World War, or a nuclear holocaust, is imminent, outdoing the bellowing doom and gloom of even the sweatiest of Baptist preachers.
As I write this, the United States and Iran are in a very tense standoff that could easily escalate to an actual war. Last week, US airstrikes in Iraq killed Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani. Iran has since vowed that its retaliation will involve military force.
Social media being the good and bad that it is, is alight with both fervent support and vehement condemnation of a war with Iran. Long before Facebook and Twitter were tools to vent our ideologies, there have been hawks who believe all war is good and right (especially the ones involving their own countries), and doves who believe all war is evil. I find it very unwise to belong to either side. Though my Christianity is itself a blanket ideology, the Bible warns of knee-jerk reactions as they relate to worldly matters - "He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is shame and folly to him" (Proverbs 18:13). Chris Rock once said as much: "anybody who makes up his mind about an issue before he hears the issue is a fool."
There are many Christians who believe the New Testament teaches outright pacifism and rejection of war. Some even go further and claim this extends to any form of violence, even self-defense. While I've never been able to glean those things from my own study of the New Testament, I do believe that the Bible condemns unjust war, just as it condemns any unjust, immoral thing from those in positions of power.
Having said that, I don't believe all war is good, but I also don't believe all war is evil.
I have a strong belief that those who aren't very knowledgeable in history have no place being politically and socially vocal, especially the more rabid among those voices, whether they be conservative, liberal, moderate, etc. (though they certainly have a right to be so brazen if they choose). I believe that the more vocal one is about their socio-political beliefs, that lustiness should be on par with their historical knowledge. Otherwise, their talking points are merely rehearsed snippets that fit their narrative, while in the context of the history surrounding whatever the issue may be, the talking point may prove completely irrelevant, or even contradict itself.
There are times in history where going to war was the right thing to do - even if the soldiers sent to fight it were sent by rich men safe behind desks in palaces. I believe Britain going to war with Germany over the latter's invasion of Belgium to get to France, violating Belgian neutrality, was the right thing to do. However, I believe Britain's violation of Greece's neutrality later that same war, was the wrong thing to do. I can cite the folly of the "ally system" in hurling Europe into such a senseless chaos. In not relegating myself to anti or pro war dogmas, I can see right and wrong even in single wars as a whole - and can see hidden motives in otherwise "good" motives.
I also recognize times when those men safe in palaces who sent soldiers to fight were in the wrong. I believe it was wrong for Leopoldo Galtieri to dispatch thousands of Argentine conscripts to invade the Falkland Islands, all to take his troubled nation's attention off of his own regime's corruption and incompetence (a time-tested way to win over your nation; just a tip, in case you ever find yourself a president or dictator and your economy is going down the toilet). Therefore, Britain's retaliation, sending its military task force to rid the islands of the Argentine invaders, who were going house to house and holding British citizens at gunpoint, was the right thing to do.
One must always look at each war individually, if you can find and count them all, and look at the reasons, the results, the maneuvers, the leaders, and a slew of other factors before making their judgment. Being all for or all against war limits one's ability to do this, and the ability to be objective. No matter how loud we talk, facts remain facts, even if they don't fit our agendas upon closer inspection.
So, believing one must be historically and contextually knowledgeable about the war one chooses to defend or oppose, and believing war as an institution is neither wholly good nor wholly evil, my position on a possible war between the United States and Iran is:
I don't know what my position is. I haven't yet made up my mind.
Among the reasons is my minimal knowledge of the Iranian influence in Iraq. I know it's been "a thing" for some time now, but I have little information or facts on which to base my opposition or support - unless I choose to base them on the same three-sentence snippets from social media posts. I'm actually ashamed to say that before last week, I had no idea who Qasem Soleimani was. I know, I missed the Qasem Soleimani bandwagon. He was a household name. Posters of his face adorned the walls of every teenage girl in Iran. But alas, I'm ignorant. If I had more knowledge of Soleimani and his history, and of Iran-Iraq affairs beyond 2003, only then could I invoke a pro or anti reaction. But, as it is, I need time to glean more information before I can declare the war - if it comes to that - to be a right or wrong move. And, only as events unfold, events I cannot predict, can I declare certain actions during that war to be good or bad.
As for the idea of "supporting the troops," I find it to be a dangerously nationalistic idea, just as dangerous as supporting all war. If I disagree with the troops' mission, how can I support the soldiers who voluntarily join the military who fights it? Doing such would be akin to opposing nude dancing while declaring that I support the strippers. If I support the war, I support the troops. If I'm against the war, I cannot logically claim I support the troops.
If one rejects the impulsive reactions borne of pro-war or anti-war ideologies, one must accept that they may wrestle with the right or wrong of some wars for years after they're over. For example, the Iraq War has been over for nearly a decade, and I'm still undecided on whether or not I believe going to Iraq was the right thing for the US to do. I also have to admit my bias, in that I have a brother who served two tours there, and several friends who did as well, and I'm afraid any denunciation would be a betrayal to them. The silver lining however is that by rejecting strict ideological blankets, I can see my own bias, and acknowledge how it might affect my judgment, which allows me to keep quiet or disqualify myself from making a judgment or even forming an opinion. (Despite our society being more opinionated than ever, and having the means to compulsively voice our thoughts to thousands at a time, remember this: it's okay not to have an opinion.)
I believe the Vietnam War was utterly pointless. But in saying so, I have the cringing feeling inside that I'm calling the service of those fought the war to be pointless. I don't want such gall as to preach to a veteran, who knows more about life and death than I can fathom, about my self-professed knowledge of history and my precious ideology - even if that veteran agrees with me.
Speaking of the soldiers who do the actual fighting, if I do find myself in support of a certain war, I must have no delusion that those on the fields and in the trenches are singing patriotic songs at night and shouting "For George, Queen and Country!" before an assault. Even if one supports a war effort, one would be foolish to forget that the soldiers who fight it are often scared, miserable, hungry, and wondering just what the war they're fighting is all about. Their opinion on the war, be it pro or con, will always, as my personal rule, outweigh any thoughts of yours or mine. My advice to anyone who does support all war, other than "stop it!," is to keep in mind that the soldiers who are fighting in your place aren't always as gung-ho about the situation as you are. No matter how well-worded our quotes from MSNBC or Fox News may be.
The shortest war story ever written was penned by an anonymous American Civil War veteran. It is only three sentences: "A bunch of us went to Gettysburg. Some of us never came back. If you weren't there, you'll never understand."
PS Go Tampa Bay. There's always next year. #BucsNation
"I was traveling with my family in the Mideast late one night
The hotel hall was quiet, the kids were out like little lights
Then the street was filled with jeeps
There was an explosion to the right
They chanted Death To America!
I was feeling like a fight..."
-Neil Young
As I write this, the United States and Iran are in a very tense standoff that could easily escalate to an actual war. Last week, US airstrikes in Iraq killed Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani. Iran has since vowed that its retaliation will involve military force.
Social media being the good and bad that it is, is alight with both fervent support and vehement condemnation of a war with Iran. Long before Facebook and Twitter were tools to vent our ideologies, there have been hawks who believe all war is good and right (especially the ones involving their own countries), and doves who believe all war is evil. I find it very unwise to belong to either side. Though my Christianity is itself a blanket ideology, the Bible warns of knee-jerk reactions as they relate to worldly matters - "He who answers a matter before he hears it, it is shame and folly to him" (Proverbs 18:13). Chris Rock once said as much: "anybody who makes up his mind about an issue before he hears the issue is a fool."
There are many Christians who believe the New Testament teaches outright pacifism and rejection of war. Some even go further and claim this extends to any form of violence, even self-defense. While I've never been able to glean those things from my own study of the New Testament, I do believe that the Bible condemns unjust war, just as it condemns any unjust, immoral thing from those in positions of power.
Having said that, I don't believe all war is good, but I also don't believe all war is evil.
I have a strong belief that those who aren't very knowledgeable in history have no place being politically and socially vocal, especially the more rabid among those voices, whether they be conservative, liberal, moderate, etc. (though they certainly have a right to be so brazen if they choose). I believe that the more vocal one is about their socio-political beliefs, that lustiness should be on par with their historical knowledge. Otherwise, their talking points are merely rehearsed snippets that fit their narrative, while in the context of the history surrounding whatever the issue may be, the talking point may prove completely irrelevant, or even contradict itself.
There are times in history where going to war was the right thing to do - even if the soldiers sent to fight it were sent by rich men safe behind desks in palaces. I believe Britain going to war with Germany over the latter's invasion of Belgium to get to France, violating Belgian neutrality, was the right thing to do. However, I believe Britain's violation of Greece's neutrality later that same war, was the wrong thing to do. I can cite the folly of the "ally system" in hurling Europe into such a senseless chaos. In not relegating myself to anti or pro war dogmas, I can see right and wrong even in single wars as a whole - and can see hidden motives in otherwise "good" motives.
I also recognize times when those men safe in palaces who sent soldiers to fight were in the wrong. I believe it was wrong for Leopoldo Galtieri to dispatch thousands of Argentine conscripts to invade the Falkland Islands, all to take his troubled nation's attention off of his own regime's corruption and incompetence (a time-tested way to win over your nation; just a tip, in case you ever find yourself a president or dictator and your economy is going down the toilet). Therefore, Britain's retaliation, sending its military task force to rid the islands of the Argentine invaders, who were going house to house and holding British citizens at gunpoint, was the right thing to do.
One must always look at each war individually, if you can find and count them all, and look at the reasons, the results, the maneuvers, the leaders, and a slew of other factors before making their judgment. Being all for or all against war limits one's ability to do this, and the ability to be objective. No matter how loud we talk, facts remain facts, even if they don't fit our agendas upon closer inspection.
So, believing one must be historically and contextually knowledgeable about the war one chooses to defend or oppose, and believing war as an institution is neither wholly good nor wholly evil, my position on a possible war between the United States and Iran is:
I don't know what my position is. I haven't yet made up my mind.
Among the reasons is my minimal knowledge of the Iranian influence in Iraq. I know it's been "a thing" for some time now, but I have little information or facts on which to base my opposition or support - unless I choose to base them on the same three-sentence snippets from social media posts. I'm actually ashamed to say that before last week, I had no idea who Qasem Soleimani was. I know, I missed the Qasem Soleimani bandwagon. He was a household name. Posters of his face adorned the walls of every teenage girl in Iran. But alas, I'm ignorant. If I had more knowledge of Soleimani and his history, and of Iran-Iraq affairs beyond 2003, only then could I invoke a pro or anti reaction. But, as it is, I need time to glean more information before I can declare the war - if it comes to that - to be a right or wrong move. And, only as events unfold, events I cannot predict, can I declare certain actions during that war to be good or bad.
As for the idea of "supporting the troops," I find it to be a dangerously nationalistic idea, just as dangerous as supporting all war. If I disagree with the troops' mission, how can I support the soldiers who voluntarily join the military who fights it? Doing such would be akin to opposing nude dancing while declaring that I support the strippers. If I support the war, I support the troops. If I'm against the war, I cannot logically claim I support the troops.
Speaking of the soldiers who do the actual fighting, if I do find myself in support of a certain war, I must have no delusion that those on the fields and in the trenches are singing patriotic songs at night and shouting "For George, Queen and Country!" before an assault. Even if one supports a war effort, one would be foolish to forget that the soldiers who fight it are often scared, miserable, hungry, and wondering just what the war they're fighting is all about. Their opinion on the war, be it pro or con, will always, as my personal rule, outweigh any thoughts of yours or mine. My advice to anyone who does support all war, other than "stop it!," is to keep in mind that the soldiers who are fighting in your place aren't always as gung-ho about the situation as you are. No matter how well-worded our quotes from MSNBC or Fox News may be.
The shortest war story ever written was penned by an anonymous American Civil War veteran. It is only three sentences: "A bunch of us went to Gettysburg. Some of us never came back. If you weren't there, you'll never understand."
PS Go Tampa Bay. There's always next year. #BucsNation
"I was traveling with my family in the Mideast late one night
The hotel hall was quiet, the kids were out like little lights
Then the street was filled with jeeps
There was an explosion to the right
They chanted Death To America!
I was feeling like a fight..."
-Neil Young
No comments:
Post a Comment